[ct-user] CTWin and serial numbers.

[MM0ANT]

Hi,
The numbers are basically allocated once per contact,
non band/mode specific. The problems caused by all known
logging software is they do not talk to each other properly causing
the same serial number to be issued to multiple terminals. This
creates an awkward situation in logging as each serial should only
be issued once. Having used NA for this and other similar contests
in the past, I understand a work around for it, but this involves entering
a false QSO and going back to edit it; this basically steals a serial to
issue to the station when you eventually work them. It works fine as such,
but this process slows down operation. Writelog also has issues with this
and the work around is to start typing a callsign, then delete it and start
again. Not exactly user-friendly. The Writelog developers basically told us
(The ones who want this fixed) to get lost as they don't care as it's a
Europe thing and only causes problems to multi-station users.

As there are quite a few RSGB (and other) contests using serial numbers
a fix for this operation would be good. I appreciate the user base is quite
small, but still relevant; Look at the amount of IOTA multi-station entries
last year.

Robert
MM0ANT
P.S. Thanks for the Telnet cluster service David. Excellent work.

At 19/04/2003 11:58, you wrote:
>For those of us who don't know the iota contest, how must numbers be
>issued for m/m in that test?  Separate numbers per band, per station, or
>one set for the whole contest???
>David Robbins K1TTT
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Subject: [ct-user] CTWin and serial numbers.
>> Hi all,
>> Before trying this I thought I would ask opinions.
>> Our club plan to operate as a Multi/Multi station during IOTA 2003
>> as GM4V. In this configuration we need serial numbers to be issued
>> correctly to the station PC's, cluster link PC(Possibly) and a spare
>> PC.
>> We note at present that NA and  Writelog do not issue serial numbers
>> correctly for this format of contest. Does CTWin? We have had issues
>> with this previously (As registered users of CT DOS) and are wondering
>> if the problem has been looked at, or fixed, in later releases.
>> All help and opinions appreciated.
>> Robert
>> www.MM0ANT.co.uk