TRLog
[Top] [All Lists]

Auto-CQ Time Adjustment

Subject: Auto-CQ Time Adjustment
From: merchant@silcom.com (Steve Merchant)
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 12:41:06 -0800
Jeff Bouvier wrote:
> 
> Steve Merchant wrote:
> >
> > As a former user of the Brand "C" program, I am used to being able to input 
> > tenths of a second adjustments to
> > the time interval between auto-CQ's.  I think Tree's implementation of the 
> > Auto-CQ feature is much more
> > elegant than Ken's, but I'd like to request one further refinement.
> >
> > I often find the one second interval too coarse when the Frequency Rustlers 
> > are being hyperactive.  I'd like
> > to be able to set the interval at 2.5 seconds rather than 3 or 2, for 
> > instance.
> >
> > Would it be possible to add a Control-J feature to select either 1 second 
> > or .5 second granularity in the
> > Auto-CQ feature?
> >
> > And, of course, if I'm missing some way to achieve this already, someone 
> > please let me know.  Lord knows Tree
> > has a long enough enhancement list as it is.
> >
> > I used 5.88 in CQWW -- something in the browser I have to use at my 
> > client's screws up .zip files and I
> > haven't had the time/energy to solve it, so I missed using 5.91.  By the 
> > sounds of the discussion a day or two
> > ago, it's probably as well I didn't.
> >
> > This program just keeps getting better.  We're looking forward to using it 
> > multi-op in ARRL CW at N6RO.
> >
> > 73, Steve K6AW
> 
> Hi Steve,
>         Funny you mention that. I was thinking the exact same thing during
> the contest. I would prefer 3.5 seconds. 2.5 is too short. Remember you have
> to use your RIT to tune 200 hz. each side of zero to catch the guys who S&P
> with the RIT on. Many folks call 200 hz. Takes that extra second to find
> them. :-) By the way, I think 4 seconds is too long. Have to keep the
> vulchers from swooping onto the qrg....
>         73, Jeff Bouvier K1AM  k1am@ids.net

Hi, Jeff -- I agree -- sometimes you have to adjust for a variety of things -- 
like K3ZO's bio breaks, hi. But 
a .5 sec variable would give me all the granularity I would need -- the tenths 
of a second is too fine for 
most situations, I think.

73, Steve K6AW
merchant@silcom.com

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>