As a new serious NA user, I did a serious effort in the CQWW CW contest
with NA 10.51. Overall, I like NA and feel comfortable with it.
However a problem developed as the QSO database increased towards my
eventual 2600 QSO total, and that was an increasing delay in the time
needed to process a QSO and log it. I noted that QSOs with call signs
starting with "J" took longer than QSOs with less common prefixes. Among
the worst were the JA1s. A 7N3 or VE4 QSO would log essentially
immediately, while a JA1 took over a second or more. I started
compensating by "entering" the QSO as soon as I got the call, and then
using the "plus" key to send the "TU" QSL during the runs. Most of my QSOs
are by running and the delay in logging the QSOs became a major
inconvenience. The worst case of all was when I was called by what I
thought was JA1XXX, but I got a letter in the suffix or prefix wrong and
had to correct it to the correct JA1XXY after the initial call was sent to
him. I use the feature where the program automatically resends the call
with the correction. In that case, the program took a long time (it seemed
up to three to five seconds) to correct the database and send JA1XXY.
During that time, the "plus" key would result in the QSL message and the
corrected call being sent over and over for up to three and four times in a
loop while the program finally logged the corrected QSO in the call field.
It would send "JA1XXY TU JA1XXY TU JA1XXY TU JA1XXY....." while I
frantically hit the escape key, but it continued until the QSO finally was
logged.
Other data: My PC has enough room for 16000 QSOs with the 8 MByte RAM. I
use the Super Check Partial feature with the Master.dta file available from
the NA web site (which is quite good). I haven't tried to run the database
with SCP disabled. That could make a difference, but I like that during a
contest and would rather use that feature. My PC is quite old, a 25 MHz
386SX, so the problem might be as basic as needing to buy a faster PC. I
am prepared to do that if that's really needed. But I wanted to pose the
issue to this esteemed group of more experienced users, plus Dave.
A second issue is that I am used (from my prior CT experience) to entering
the call with the "insert" key and continuing to type in the last two or
three characters of the call. NA, however, transmits the call as it was in
the "call field" at the time the "insert" or "enter" key was pressed, and
does not pick up the characters typed after the "enter" fubnction was
activated. Sometimes it will allow one more character, but usually none.
CT allows the user to continue to type characters and sends every character
entered in the keyboard buffer at the time the call is sent. Is this a
fundamental difference between NA and CT? It's a pretty minor issue, but
as a slowish typist, over the years I have gotten used to entering a call
and then typing the last part so I can start transmitting sooner, rather
than waiting until the entire call is entered in the call field. Comments
on this-other than I need to be a fast touch typist!
Thanks in advance for your advice and comments.
Jim George N3BB
--
Submissions: na-user@contesting.com
Administrative requests: na-user-REQUEST@contesting.com
WWW: http://datom.contesting.com/
Questions: owner-na-user@contesting.com
|