Re: ARRL 160m

[Nate Bargmann]

* On 2019 08 Dec 10:07 -0600, Drew Arnett wrote:
> I played for a couple of hours with the 160m contest as well from a
> very noisy location, so not very many QSOs.  Worked a big gun east of
> the Mississippi, but no KG4 for me.  :-)  Didn't consult with Nate for
> rules or config file.  Just grabbed the distributed arrl160m_usa rules
> and merged a bit from my own files from the last contest.

Like I noted, this KG4 was a 2x1 in VA so no GITMO for me either.

> I worked a couple of stations during auto CQ, and the rest in S&P.
> Messages and ESM both worked great.  I guest operated at another
> station for a bit during CQ WW.  They weren't using ESM.  Wasn't bad
> using the function keys, but I missed ESM as someone how can touch
> type.

For me, using ESM in S&P is a bit disconcerting as when Enter is pressed
after receiving the running stations exchange, the QSO is logged before
my exchange is even sent, let alone confirmed.  This is why I did a bit
of work so that in CT mode the Enter key only logs the QSO when both
fields have something it them.

My S&P sequence was as follows:

:CFG and uncomment CTCOMPATIBLE in logcfg.dat, Tlf reloads and resets
the configuration.

Type in the running station's call.

Press F6 to send my call.

Type in his exchange, if DX only a signal report is sent so type a space
character in the exchange field, otherwise ARRL section is typed.

Press Alt-1 which is set to "TU +5NN- KS" (I left F3 set to "@ +5NN- KS".

Press Enter once he sends TU or CFM or whatever.



Out of that sequence, what I would consider changing would be if the
exchange field is empty that Enter sends mycall (F6), similar to ESM.

I would also consider changing Insert to send the S&P_TU_MSG macro
instead of F3.  To go along with this would be enabling a notion of CQ
and S&P in CT mode so the messages sent would be mostly the same as ESM,
but with different keystrokes and with Enter logging when there are
characters in each field.

Also, in S&P, having the + key send "TU" then log was awkward as
convention seems to prefer the S&P station to send "TU exchange" these
days.

> I've noticed that clear the call field behavior of the ESC key as
> well.  If there is an alternate behavior that makes sense and doesn't
> make ESM worse, I'd love to consider it.  It is slightly annoying, but
> I didn't fret over it too much, as I figured it was good practice for
> short term callsign memory.  If getting a fill is taking time, it
> might push the limits of my short term memory, though.

My short term memory is working hard enough being two to three
characters behind his sending!  Losing the callsign just because he
decided to start sending his call again a few milliseconds after I fired
the exchange macro and wanting to stop it to get back in sync with him
is annoying.

I could imagine ESC working like this:

If the callsign and exchange fields have characters in them, ESC works
just as now but stopping the TX and successively clearing the fields on
additional presses.

If the callsign field has characters and the exchange field is empty
with the cursor in either, then ESC stops TX.  The second press would
clear the callsign and make sure the cursor is in the callsign field.

The tricky part is, what if there is no TX, I think the current behavior
is to clear the fields immediately, exchange then callsign on successive
presses.

Since this would be new behavior, it's likely that it should be disabled
by default and enabled with a keyword command as many are probably used
to the current behavior.

73, Nate

-- 

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
possible worlds.  The pessimist fears this is true."

Web: https://www.n0nb.us
Projects: https://github.com/N0NB
GPG fingerprint: 82D6 4F6B 0E67 CD41 F689 BBA6 FB2C 5130 D55A 8819

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature