If the spot is a DXpedition ... he may still be running on that frequency 5
hours later ....
K1VV
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Reisert AD1C" <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>
To: "Kurszewski Chad-WCK005" <Chad.Kurszewski@motorola.com>;
<writelog@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2000 2:13 PM
Subject: RE: [WriteLog] Packet spots
>
> At 12:22 PM 11/1/00 -0600, Kurszewski Chad-WCK005 wrote:
>
> >Sure, that sorting would be great except you still need the
> >timestamp displayed. You could have an empty "Packet
> >Spots" window when a "new" spot shows up, which could
> >be very old (1-2 hrs). Since there isn't a new spot
> >of the same station, you would still get notified of
> >the ancient, useless spot.
>
> Don't the spots disappear when you work the station, or ignored if already
> worked, like in CT? If so, having the hour-old spot show up after you
> worked it from the "real" spot should mean that it doesn't even get added
> to the window.
>
> And in the other case, where you didn't work it, if the hour-old spot is
> the first one you got (just sat down, just turned on the computer,
> whatever), there's still some chance the station may still be there.
>
> I agree that having the timestamp would be *helpful* but I don't think
it's
> *necessary*.
>
> - Jim
>
>
> --
> Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>
> http://www.ad1c.com/
>
>
> --
> WWW: http://www.writelog.com/
> Submissions: writelog@contesting.com
> Administrative requests: writelog-REQUEST@contesting.com
> Problems: owner-writelog@contesting.com
>
>
>
--
WWW: http://www.writelog.com/
Submissions: writelog@contesting.com
Administrative requests: writelog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-writelog@contesting.com
|