On rare occasions during the RTTY Roundup I copied running stations on FT4 sending messages beginning with TU; and then continuing with the exchange for the next station. I even found myself sending t

That's true Reino. A QSL is valid without the final acknowledgement, since callsigns and some additional information have been confirmed by that point. But you can't be sure until you receive a QSL ca

Hi Rich I believe you have summarized the situation correctly - thanks for the better explanation. Mind you, if WSJT-X can incorporate a "TU" in a CQ message after a QSO with repeats, it might as well

In my experience, logging in WSJT-X ( at least recent versions) does not lose this info. Uploading the wsjtx.adi file to LOTW works fine. However, in contest modes the Cabrillo file does lose the dist

We had some issues in a recent multi-operator event where N3FJP was still logging FT8 as RY in the Cabrillo file. Glad they are getting things sorted out. 73, Steve VE3SMA

I entirely agree, Joe. It was just odd to find it still putting RY in the Cabrillo rather than DG. But if we use N3FJP again, it sounds like things ought to work better now. 73, Steve VE3SMA

Has anyone any experience or opinion on what an acceptable power amplifier supply ripple is for WSJT-X modes? My guess is that the suppression with respect to the main signal of the sidebands due to 1

oops..that should be a plus sign: 20 log (percent_ripple/100) + 3 dB

Roger I meant that 2% number purely as an example. But, in practice, I doubt if our regulator would really care - they try not to spend any money on the Amateur Service that isn't absolutely necessary

For comparison, ARRL handbooks used to recommend better than 5% ripple for a CW transmitter and 3% for linear amplifier plate voltages - I don't have a recent handbooks to see if this has changed. Rip

Carey, Jim and John are right....with typical power supplies there should be no issue with ripple. However, for homebrew power supplies, and unregulated supplies as used in a lot of linear amps (all t

Richard (G4DYA) Your analysis method is quite convincing. Thanks! But shouldn't the 2 percent factor be 34 dB rather than 37? 73, Steve VE3SMA

Plenty of FT8 contest activity at 14.130. 73, Steve VE3SMA

I believe that (for any mode) the LOTW "Station Location" contains the grid, but only if the user specifies it. If not specified, then it will not appear in an LOTW confirmation. I think it has nothin

I had one case where a station (not in contest mode) called me using message 2, so he never sent his grid. As I understand it, WSJT-X is supposed to switch the non-contest-mode station into contest mo

I guess I wasn't clear enough, Reino....they sent a signal report as the first transmission....there is no signal report in NA VHF Contest mode. 73, Steve

It seems I have something similar happening in 2.2.1. Lookup apparently does not work at all. Even if I add a new callsign to CALL3.txt, I am unable to look it up even in the current session. I did ch

OK. Esc works for me...once the DX Call box is empty, then Lookup works. And If I delete the last two characters of a grid for a callsign which is in CALL3.txt, then Lookup works and fills in the last

Dana I recall K1RZ and I had one or two long drawn-out VHF contest QSOs disallowed for some complicated reason involving whether the logging software recorded start or end times. So it's pretty import

Strangely enough, my only west coast QSO was on FT4. It was good to hear more of it in this contest than previously. I agree with Pat on the fading thing - I lose quite a few sporadic-E QSOs because t