locked Answering FTx CQ with Tx2-message #QSO_practices


SA5QED/David <s@...>
 

I have noticed that sometimes my CQ calls, are responded to with a Tx2 message (containing Report Rcvd), instead of a Tx1 message (containing DX grid).
This means that I cannot calculate the distance. No big problem of course.
Guess thi occurs when DX station does not have the Auto Seq feature checked and that they are trying to shorten the total QSO time by omitting the Tx1 message.

Would be nice to have a checkbox "Only respond to Tx1 replies" (when Auto Seq is checked).

Example wtith NO Tx1 message in reply to QSO:
110922 Tx 1959 + CQ SE5M JO89
110930 -8 0.2 1655 + SE5M RA3xx -02
110937 Tx 1959 + RA3xx SE5M R-08
110945 -11 0.2 1656 + SE5M RA3xx RR73
110952 Tx 1959 + RA3xx SE5M 73

73 de David SE5M


Chuck - KY4CU
 

It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2, disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next column or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than RRR for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.


Roger
 

On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:
In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2, disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next column or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than RRR for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.
Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA


Carlos
 

.... locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I >regard them as incomplete.
OK, well, its up to you Roger....
And, do the other station know, that you did not log the QSO ?
Is for you the missing locator a reason for a faulty QSO ???
73, Karl OE3JAG
Am 26.01.22, 13:40 schrieb Roger <groups@...>:

On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's
mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as
possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2,
disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next column
or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than RRR
for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.

Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA






Roger
 

On 26/01/2022 15:28, Carlos wrote:
.... locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I >regard them as incomplete.
OK, well, its up to you Roger....
And, do the other station know, that you did not log the QSO ?
Is for you the missing locator a reason for a faulty QSO ???
73, Karl OE3JAG
Normally there is no requirement to log any QSO in the UK so there should be no expectation any QSO will be logged.

I usually ignore calls without a grid but the odd one creeps through.

I like to collect the grid of stations I work so a QSO without without a grid is useless to me.

73
Roger
G4HZA

Am 26.01.22, 13:40 schrieb Roger <groups@...>:

On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's
mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as
possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2,
disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next column
or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than RRR
for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.

Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA






Lawrence Godek
 

I don't know about other logging systems but in the one i use, LOG4OM, when i start a QSO with another station the call sign goes from WSJT, JTAlert and Log4OM about the same time.  In WSJT i only see 4 digits in the GRID box.  Not a problem.  As soon as LOG4OM pulls the data up for that call sign from QRZ.COM i immediately copy, manually by typing it in via the keyboard into the grid box of WSJT.  When the QSo is complete and i get the screen that shows the QSo details, i click on ok and it logs it with all that info. In the event i forget to type it into the WSJT grid box, i can always wait and type it into the grid/locator box before the QSO is logged.  Not an issue.

I can't understand why so many people have a problem with manually updating the grid box if they want  it populated when the info should be displayed in their logging program.  QRZ sends 6 digit grid locations if the licensee has correct data in their profile.

Otherwise there is a program out there that you can type the address of your QSo partner in and it will show their exact location and at the top of the screen show you what that particular grid location is.

regarding starting a QSO with the TX2, i normally don't respond to stations that start out with TX2.  PERIOD!  Maybe that's a good thing if in contests but normal day to day, naw, no need to go that route.  Now if the developers of WSJT decide to alter their program to make that the way it's gonna be, then that's a different story.

Larry W0OGH

On 1/26/2022 4:36 AM, SA5QED/David wrote:
I have noticed that sometimes my CQ calls, are responded to with a Tx2 message (containing Report Rcvd), instead of a Tx1 message (containing DX grid).
This means that I cannot calculate the distance. No big problem of course.
Guess thi occurs when DX station does not have the Auto Seq feature checked and that they are trying to shorten the total QSO time by omitting the Tx1 message.

Would be nice to have a checkbox "Only respond to Tx1 replies" (when Auto Seq is checked).

Example wtith NO Tx1 message in reply to QSO:
110922 Tx 1959 + CQ SE5M JO89
110930 -8 0.2 1655 + SE5M RA3xx -02
110937 Tx 1959 + RA3xx SE5M R-08
110945 -11 0.2 1656 + SE5M RA3xx RR73
110952 Tx 1959 + RA3xx SE5M 73

73 de David SE5M




N1BUG
 

regarding starting a QSO with the TX2, i normally don't respond to stations that start out with TX2.  PERIOD!
Well, we are all different. When responding to others I usually start with TX1 unless I see that they are responding to and perhaps preferring callers who start with TX2 (as is often the case with semi-rare DX). I would prefer to start with TX2 but I know many don't like that so I try to be courteous and give them what they want.

When I call CQ, I give priority to stations who call me with TX2, at least to the extent that I can process the information presented and choose one quickly enough. I primarily work DX. With the often extreme and constantly varying QRM on busy FT8 channels, shortening the QSO gives me a better chance of completing the QSO before the other station gets buried under stronger signals. I know WSJT-X is very good at sorting out overlapping signals, but there are limits and I lose quite a few to QRM.

Paul N1BUG


s52d
 

Hi!

If you make QSO, then it shall be logged and confirmed (QSL, LotW etc).

Making a QSO and then ignoring it is like "I do not like letter W. I never confirm QSOs with stations with W in their callsign".

I like TX2: then I know  how I am heard and what to expect.

We've been into this stories in JT65 on HF times:  some people do not like if called with TX2,

others do not like RR73, others expect one additional 73.

Funny: all this objections are gone when new country pops up.

Anyhow, some 20 % QSOs are never confirmed. That is life.

73 gl

Iztok, S52D

BTW, I do log CW QSOs even without name/qth and with redundant 599 RST.

On 1/26/22 1:40 PM, Roger wrote:
On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2, disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next column or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than RRR for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.

Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA





careyfisher@...
 

Roger,
What do you do with all those grids you collect?
73, Carey, WB4HXE

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 11:14 AM Roger <groups@...> wrote:

On 26/01/2022 15:28, Carlos wrote:
.... locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I >regard them as incomplete.
OK, well, its up to you Roger....
And, do the other station know, that you did not log the QSO ?
Is for you the missing locator a reason for a faulty QSO ???
73, Karl OE3JAG
Normally there is no requirement to log any QSO in the UK so there
should be no expectation any QSO will be logged.

I usually ignore calls without a grid but the odd one creeps through.

I like to collect the grid of stations I work so a QSO without without a
grid is useless to me.

73
Roger
G4HZA

Am 26.01.22, 13:40 schrieb Roger <groups@...>:

On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's
mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short as
possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message #2,
disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the Next
column
or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73 rather than
RRR
for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.

Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in
Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA













--
Carey Fisher
careyfisher@...


Jim Brown
 

On 1/26/2022 4:40 AM, Roger wrote:
Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator in Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.
A QSO is defined as the exchange of, and the confirmation of, the transmission and reception by both parties of the callsign and one other piece of information. For nearly a century, a signal report has been used as the second piece of information. The use of a Maidenhead grid is a newcomer, introduced, I think, by VHF/UHF awards and contesting in the last half century.

73, Jim K9YC


Jim Brown
 

On 1/26/2022 8:14 AM, Roger wrote:
Normally there is no requirement to log any QSO in the UK so there should be no expectation any QSO will be logged.
I usually ignore calls without a grid but the odd one creeps through.
I like to collect the grid of stations I work so a QSO without without a grid is useless
That is a selfish position. Besides, the grid should be included in the LOTW confirmation, which is the modern equivalent of a paper QSL. When I came into the hobby as a school boy 66 years ago, a QSL was considered the final courtesy of a QSO, and each party paid for the stamp on their own card.

73, Jim K9YC


Jim Shorney
 

Another aspect of this is that the QSO with no grid may have no value to the OP but it may have tremendous value to the caller. The ones we need the most are the ones that are hardest to find and work. :)

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 19:19:45 +0100
"Iztok" <s52d@...> wrote:

Hi!

If you make QSO, then it shall be logged and confirmed (QSL, LotW etc).

Making a QSO and then ignoring it is like "I do not like letter W. I
never confirm QSOs with stations with W in their callsign".

I like TX2: then I know  how I am heard and what to expect.

We've been into this stories in JT65 on HF times:  some people do not
like if called with TX2,

others do not like RR73, others expect one additional 73.

Funny: all this objections are gone when new country pops up.

Anyhow, some 20 % QSOs are never confirmed. That is life.

73 gl

Iztok, S52D

BTW, I do log CW QSOs even without name/qth and with redundant 599 RST.


On 1/26/22 1:40 PM, Roger wrote:
On 26/01/2022 12:22, Chuck - KY4CU wrote:
It's fairly standard to use this method to move things along. It's
mentioned in 10.5 of the user's guide:

In some circumstances it may be desirable to make your QSOs as short
as possible. To configure the program to start contacts with message
#2, disable message #1 by double-clicking its radio-button in the
Next column or Tx 1 button in the Now column. Similarly, to send RR73
rather than RRR for message #4, double-click one of its buttons.

Unless they have a complex call which prevents sending their locator
in Tx 1 I do not log these QSOs as I regard them as incomplete.

73
Roger
GW4HZA









WB5JJJ - George
 

The only time a grid is vastly important is on 6m and above. There are 2 certificates where these come into play: VUCC and FFMA. On those bands, I try to never work a station that does not start with TX1 so I'm sure their grid is correct for this contact. The FFMA is for working all 488 grid squares in the Lower 48 for the certificate. Of course, the VHF/UHF "rovers" always publicize their exact grid square ahead of when "in the field" on many forums and sites, so they may start with TX2.

Having said all of that above, most logging programs will automatically download from QRZ information about your contact. So, these loggers will import the grid square and populate your log accordingly. That's why most loggers will not change the grid square from WSJTx should it be different than what QRZ shows for that station. There is one big problem with this. If you make contact with someone that is NOT at their home of record (QTH), and they start with TX2, then this automatic process is flawed.

--
73's
George - WB5JJJ
Hamshack Holine #4969


Jim Brown
 

On 1/27/2022 7:15 AM, WB5JJJ - George wrote:
The only time a grid is vastly important is on 6m and above.
Right -- except for the CQ Field award, which is for all of the Fields, which are the first two digits (alpha characters) of the Maidenhead grid. The Honor Roll starts with 175 of them, and approximately that number are on land. After that, you're working /MM stations.

Recently, there was Russian op on a commercial vessel working FT8 on various HF bands. He never sent his grid, but PSKReporter would show his location, and his grid is on his LOTW conformation a week later. W6OAT, who got me started on the award, and I both picked up a (different) grid from him; for me, it was #228. For Rusty, probably #250.

There are 2 certificates where these come into play: VUCC and FFMA. On those bands, I try to never work a station that does not start with TX1 so I'm sure their grid is correct for this contact. The FFMA is for working all 488 grid squares in the Lower 48 for the certificate. Of course, the VHF/UHF "rovers" always publicize their exact grid square ahead of when "in the field" on many forums and sites, so they may start with TX2.

On 6M, I'm up to 612 grids worldwide, 457 confirmed for FFMA. I call stations (and respond first those) who MIGHT be in a grid I need. At age 80, I don't expect to live long enough to finish FFMA.

Having said all of that above, most logging programs will automatically download from QRZ information about your contact. So, these loggers will import the grid square and populate your log accordingly. That's why most loggers will not change the grid square from WSJTx should it be different than what QRZ shows for that station.
I have long used DXKeeper, part of the FREEware DXLabs suite, and it DOES modify the log to what it gets from LOTW.

73, Jim K9YC