Date   
Re: "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thank you for that explanation.

I was anticipating that if I had the "QSL Via" pane set to LoTW, that the main DXKeeper display would show active LoTW participants (based on the LoTW tab setting of "Maximum age of most recent LoTW upload to be considered "active" (months)", who had so far failed to QSL for a QSO that I had uploaded to LoTW.

+ That's not correct. On the Main window's QSL tab, setting the "QSL Via" panel to LoTW simply configures the controls on that tab for submitting QSOs to LoTW, and syncing with LoTW. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/QSLing>


That would suggest to me that I should "ping" that LoTW participant via email, if they had uploaded to LoTW since our QSO took place.

+ In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, depressing the CTRL key while clicking the LoTW button will filter the Log Page Display to contain all QSOs not yet confirmed via LoTW, even though your QSO partner has submitted QSOs to LoTW after the date of your QSO. These are QSOs partners that merit an email message, as they may have incorrectly submitted your QSO details to LoTW. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/FilterLog.htm#LotW>


Isn't that what SpotCollector is advising when a spot shows in the default blue font, with the yellow or light blue background? That I have a QSO logged with that station, but it has not been confirmed via LoTW?

+ That's not correct. Background colors in SpotCollector only indicate a station's participation in LoTW by having submitted QSOs within a timeframe you've specified; they do not indicate the presence of unconfirmed QSOs in your log. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector/Help/SpotDatabase.htm#Highlighting%20Spot%20Database%20Entries%20of%20stations%20known%20to%20participate%20in%20ARRL's%20Logbook%20of%20the%20World%20(LotW)>

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

FW: [ARRL-LoTW] TQSL 2.4.5 Defect

Dave AA6YQ
 

A DXKeeper user reported a defect in TQSL 2.4.5 that could affect users of any logging program that runs on Windows and uses TQSL on behalf of the user.

If a QSO has an error, such as a bad callsign, then the message sent to command line applications is jumbled gibberish. It might have enough text to make out the message, and may not.

This doesn't affect TQSL used "directly", only when it's used by loggers to upload QSOs, but it makes it pretty difficult to understand why a QSO is being rejected.

If you're running into this, there's an updated version with the fix which the reporting user has confirmed corrects the defect.

The release candidate is available here:
https://www.rickmurphy.net/lotw/tqsl-2.4.6.msi


I'll be releasing this as production this weekend there's no other issues reported.

Apologies for yet another quick release, but this is a pretty serious defect.


73,
-Rick

Remove R from QSL sent box

Julio Peralta
 

Is there a way to remove the R from the QSL sent box for several QSO records at one time? I have a need to send just a couple of QSL’s to the buro and when I do an add requested about 10 QSO’s fill the window. I’m not sure how the R got placed in the sent box as I didn’t do it.

 

I only want to print one label and want to permanently remove the R from the QSL sent box of these others.

 

Julio, W4HY

Re: Remove R from QSL sent box

Salvatore Besso
 

Julio,

make a log backup before doing any en masse update.

Filter the log for the QSOs you need to modify.

Then open the (ADV)anced dialog.

At bottom select the field to be "bulk" modified in the "Item name"
combo box, in this case QSL_Sent.

Select the new value in the "Item new value" combo box, in this case
nothing (NULL), leave the combo empty.

Click the Mod button to update.

Did I alredy mention to BACKUP THE LOG before doing this operation? :-)

Did I alredy mention to FILTER THE LOG before doing this operation? :-)

I guess that the (R)equested value is a default, but I don't remember if
there is a setting modifiable by the user.

73 de
Salvatore (I4FYV)

for white stick operators

Frank Pletinck <frank.pletinck@...>
 

Hello,

 

Is there any white stick operator who uses dxlabsuite with jaws ?

 

73 Frank ON4AAC

Re: for white stick operators

eddy on5jk
 

Wat is Jaws? (Is ook een haaienfilm natuurlijk)

Eddy ON5JK

Op 17/04/2019 om 11:08 schreef Frank Pletinck:

Hello,

 

Is there any white stick operator who uses dxlabsuite with jaws ?

 

73 Frank ON4AAC


Virusvrij. www.avg.com

Re: "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

Jim McPhee
 

Dave,

Thanks again for taking the time to provide that explanation.

If I may go back to the original question, because it appears I did not explain myself very well:

For seven of these award families, DXKeeper provides Realtime Award Tracking (RAT) service, which enables SpotCollector <https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector>  to immediately identify active DX stations with whom a QSO would advance your award progress, and which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

SpotCollector does do that "Realtime", without having to run a filtered report, by displaying "Unworked DX Band or Mode" in one colored font, and "Unconfirmed DX" in another colored font.

Is there a way to configure DXKeeper to, in Realtime,  "immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress", similar to the way that SpotCollector does?

73,

 Jim McPhee

Placitas, NM

W5ABA

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2019 7:37 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thank you for that explanation.

I was anticipating that if I had the "QSL Via" pane set to LoTW, that the main DXKeeper display would show active LoTW participants (based on the LoTW tab setting of "Maximum age of most recent LoTW upload to be considered "active" (months)", who had so far failed to QSL for a QSO that I had uploaded to LoTW.

+ That's not correct. On the Main window's QSL tab, setting the "QSL Via" panel to LoTW simply configures the controls on that tab for submitting QSOs to LoTW, and syncing with LoTW. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxlabwiki/QSLing>


That would suggest to me that I should "ping" that LoTW participant via email, if they had uploaded to LoTW since our QSO took place.

+ In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, depressing the CTRL key while clicking the LoTW button will filter the Log Page Display to contain all QSOs not yet confirmed via LoTW, even though your QSO partner has submitted QSOs to LoTW after the date of your QSO. These are QSOs partners that merit an email message, as they may have incorrectly submitted your QSO details to LoTW. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/FilterLog.htm#LotW>


Isn't that what SpotCollector is advising when a spot shows in the default blue font, with the yellow or light blue background? That I have a QSO logged with that station, but it has not been confirmed via LoTW?

+ That's not correct. Background colors in SpotCollector only indicate a station's participation in LoTW by having submitted QSOs within a timeframe you've specified; they do not indicate the presence of unconfirmed QSOs in your log. See

<https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector/Help/SpotDatabase.htm#Highlighting%20Spot%20Database%20Entries%20of%20stations%20known%20to%20participate%20in%20ARRL's%20Logbook%20of%20the%20World%20(LotW)>

        73,

              Dave, AA6YQ



--
Jim McPhee
Placitas, NM
W5ABA

Re: Remove R from QSL sent box

Julio Peralta
 

Thank you Salvatore that worked FB.

Julio

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On Behalf Of Salvatore Besso
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 10:06 AM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Remove R from QSL sent box

Julio,

make a log backup before doing any en masse update.

Filter the log for the QSOs you need to modify.

Then open the (ADV)anced dialog.

At bottom select the field to be "bulk" modified in the "Item name"
combo box, in this case QSL_Sent.

Select the new value in the "Item new value" combo box, in this case
nothing (NULL), leave the combo empty.

Click the Mod button to update.

Did I alredy mention to BACKUP THE LOG before doing this operation? :-)

Did I alredy mention to FILTER THE LOG before doing this operation? :-)

I guess that the (R)equested value is a default, but I don't remember if
there is a setting modifiable by the user.

73 de
Salvatore (I4FYV)

SWL

Julio Peralta
 

After you print SWL labels and click on the Update Log button does it make any change to the log entry for that QSO? I couldn’t find any changes.

 

Julio, W4HY

What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

Hugh Valentine
 

When a band is crowded with greater than 40 stations to decode I experience a delay of a couple of seconds to fill the screen in JTDX Alert.
Is this a function of CPU Speed or memory? 
What is the minimum Chip speed/memory necessary to speed this screen fill?  Or is INet speed the limiting factor here???

I5 chip on my computer/8GB memory.....Would a SSD Drive help?  Or do I need a new computer?

any insight would help steer me in the proper direction.....

Val
N4RJ

Re: What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

Email Service
 

I have an i3 w 16 GB RAM SSD drive. No delays with screen full of traces. Running W10.
73 jack AK7O

Sent from XFINITY Connect App



------ Original Message ------

From: Hugh Valentine
To: DXLab@groups.io
Sent: April 17, 2019 at 5:49 PM
Subject: [DXLab] What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

When a band is crowded with greater than 40 stations to decode I experience a delay of a couple of seconds to fill the screen in JTDX Alert.
Is this a function of CPU Speed or memory? 
What is the minimum Chip speed/memory necessary to speed this screen fill?  Or is INet speed the limiting factor here???

I5 chip on my computer/8GB memory.....Would a SSD Drive help?  Or do I need a new computer?

any insight would help steer me in the proper direction.....

Val
N4RJ

Re: What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

Peter Laws
 

On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 7:56 PM Email Service <jfriend31@...> wrote:

I have an i3 w 16 GB RAM SSD drive. No delays with screen full of traces. Running W10.
73 jack AK7O
Same config here (in an Intel NUC, which I really like) and have no
issues with FT8 (WAS on 30m/FT8 in 30 days :-)). I attribute any
delay to the software doing it's thing. I suppose a faster CPU would
make it go faster, but there is enough "think time" in the FT8 QSO
cycle that it hasn't been an issue.

Not sure I'd try it on a 90 MHz Pentium.



--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!

Re: Remove R from QSL sent box

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

I guess that the (R)equested value is a default, but I don't remember if there is a setting modifiable by the user.

+ There is: the "Preset QSL Requested" option on the "QSL Configuration" window's General tab.

+ WinWarbler provides a similar "preset QSL checkbox" option in the "QSO Info" panel on its Configuration window's Log tab.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thanks again for taking the time to provide that explanation.

If I may go back to the original question, because it appears I did not explain myself very well:

For seven of these award families, DXKeeper provides Realtime Award Tracking (RAT) service, which enables SpotCollector <https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector> to immediately identify active DX stations with whom a QSO would advance your award progress, and which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

SpotCollector does do that "Realtime", without having to run a filtered report, by displaying "Unworked DX Band or Mode" in one colored font, and "Unconfirmed DX" in another colored font.

Is there a way to configure DXKeeper to, in Realtime, "immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress", similar to the way that SpotCollector does?

+ No. The CPU consumption required to do that in SpotCollector is well-justified, but there is no justification for doing that in DXKeeper.

+ In general, the reason you'd want to identify logged QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress is so you can generate outgoing QSL cards requesting those confirmation - an action you might take once a day if you're being aggressive about it. That's what the "Add Needed" function does.

+ If you'd like to filter the Log Page Display to show only QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress, you can take advantage of the fact that when adding a needed QSO to the "QSL Queue", the "Add Needed" function sets that QSO's Select item to 'Y'. So

1. In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, click the X button to remove all filtering from the Log Page Display

2. On the Main window's "Check Progress" tab, click the "Clear Select" button at the bottom of the tab; this will clear the Select item in every logged QSO

3. Invoke the "Add Needed" function as previously suggested; if you're not going to be generating QSL cards, click the Clear button on the Main window's QSL tab

4. In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, click the Sel button; the Log Page Display will be filtered to contain only those QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress.

+ It should be noted that CQ DX Marathon does not require submission of confirmed QSOs. Thus while SpotCollector highlights active DX stations needed for CQ DX Marathon on the bands and modes you're pursuing, DXKeeper's "Add Needed" does not populate the QSL Queue with QSOs that you'll be submitting for CQ DX Marathon at the end of the year unless they are also needed for an award like DXCC or WAZ that requires confirmation.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: SWL

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

After you print SWL labels and click on the Update Log button does it make any change to the log entry for that QSO?

+ No changes are made to a logged QSO for which an SWL report was generated.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

Dave AA6YQ
 

+ AA6YQ comments below

When a band is crowded with greater than 40 stations to decode I experience a delay of a couple of seconds to fill the screen in JTDX Alert.

+ I am not at all familiar with "JTDX Alert", but before considering hardware upgrades I suggest that you reboot Windows into "Safe Mode with Networking", and re-assess performance. It performance has substantially improved, then one or more applications that Windows is starting automatically when booted "normally" is interfering with "JTDX Alert". The usual culprit is a misconfigured firewall or anti-malware application.

Is this a function of CPU Speed or memory?
What is the minimum Chip speed/memory necessary to speed this screen fill? Or is INet speed the limiting factor here???

I5 chip on my computer/8GB memory.....Would a SSD Drive help? Or do I need a new computer?

+ If performance doesn't change when Windows is in "Safe Mode with Networking", then I suggest that you run the Windows Task Manager while you are running your amateur radio applications. Sorting by "CPU %" and then by "Memory" will indicate whether your CPU is "too busy", or whether your applications are consuming more RAM than is available. Assuming you have open slots, adding RAM is usually the least expensive way to improve performance - but if the problem is that your CPU is too slow for the applications you're trying to run simultaneously, adding RAM may not help much.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: Remove R from QSL sent box

Salvatore Besso
 

ah, that's it! I had seen that checkbox in DXKeeper, but it's for the
capture window that I don't use because I use only WinWarbler and I
forgot that it has a similar setting.

73 de
Salvatore (I4FYV)

Re: Remove R from QSL sent box

Julio Peralta
 

Thanks for the info Dave, however neither box was checked. There were only 8
so not a big deal.

Julio

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io [mailto:DXLab@groups.io] On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 9:47 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] Remove R from QSL sent box

+ AA6YQ comments below

I guess that the (R)equested value is a default, but I don't remember if
there is a setting modifiable by the user.

+ There is: the "Preset QSL Requested" option on the "QSL Configuration"
window's General tab.

+ WinWarbler provides a similar "preset QSL checkbox" option in the "QSO
Info" panel on its Configuration window's Log tab.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ

Re: What Computer Speed/Memory needed to fully and rapidly decode over 40 stations on a crowded band????

ve3ki
 

This question has nothing to do with DXLab Suite. You'd probably be better off posing this question on the HamApps group.

That being said, on a busy band I think it is reasonable and normal to see it take a couple of seconds into the next receive period before all of the decoding and JTAlert processing is completed. There is a lot of heavy number-crunching involved in decoding these signals.

73,
Rich VE3KI



On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 07:49 PM, Hugh Valentine wrote:
When a band is crowded with greater than 40 stations to decode I experience a delay of a couple of seconds to fill the screen in JTDX Alert.
Is this a function of CPU Speed or memory? 
What is the minimum Chip speed/memory necessary to speed this screen fill?  Or is INet speed the limiting factor here???

I5 chip on my computer/8GB memory.....Would a SSD Drive help?  Or do I need a new computer?

any insight would help steer me in the proper direction.....

Val
N4RJ

Re: "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

Jim McPhee
 

Dave,

Fantastic explanation of the Realtime Award Tracking service design and implementation differences between SpotCollector and DXKeeper. Thank you again for taking your valuable time to help me understand why each works the way it does!

And for describing the steps to take to " filter the Log Page Display to show only QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress." I'm going to print this email out and put it in my "Quick Reference" folder.

For my first DXCC Award I've been focusing almost entirely on stations that participate in LoTW. I think if I can get some of the "DX LoTW participants" that I have unconfirmed QSOs with to confirm those QSOs, I might reach the required number quite soon.

73,

Jim McPhee
Placitas, NM
W5ABA

-----Original Message-----
From: DXLab@groups.io <DXLab@groups.io> On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2019 8:00 PM
To: DXLab@groups.io
Subject: Re: [DXLab] "which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

+ AA6YQ comments below

Thanks again for taking the time to provide that explanation.

If I may go back to the original question, because it appears I did not explain myself very well:

For seven of these award families, DXKeeper provides Realtime Award Tracking (RAT) service, which enables SpotCollector <https://www.dxlabsuite.com/spotcollector> to immediately identify active DX stations with whom a QSO would advance your award progress, and which enables DXKeeper to immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress:"

SpotCollector does do that "Realtime", without having to run a filtered report, by displaying "Unworked DX Band or Mode" in one colored font, and "Unconfirmed DX" in another colored font.

Is there a way to configure DXKeeper to, in Realtime, "immediately identify QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress", similar to the way that SpotCollector does?

+ No. The CPU consumption required to do that in SpotCollector is well-justified, but there is no justification for doing that in DXKeeper.

+ In general, the reason you'd want to identify logged QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress is so you can generate outgoing QSL cards requesting those confirmation - an action you might take once a day if you're being aggressive about it. That's what the "Add Needed" function does.

+ If you'd like to filter the Log Page Display to show only QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress, you can take advantage of the fact that when adding a needed QSO to the "QSL Queue", the "Add Needed" function sets that QSO's Select item to 'Y'. So

1. In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, click the X button to remove all filtering from the Log Page Display

2. On the Main window's "Check Progress" tab, click the "Clear Select" button at the bottom of the tab; this will clear the Select item in every logged QSO

3. Invoke the "Add Needed" function as previously suggested; if you're not going to be generating QSL cards, click the Clear button on the Main window's QSL tab

4. In the Filter panel at the bottom of the Main window's "Log QSOs" tab, click the Sel button; the Log Page Display will be filtered to contain only those QSOs whose confirmation would advance your award progress.

+ It should be noted that CQ DX Marathon does not require submission of confirmed QSOs. Thus while SpotCollector highlights active DX stations needed for CQ DX Marathon on the bands and modes you're pursuing, DXKeeper's "Add Needed" does not populate the QSL Queue with QSOs that you'll be submitting for CQ DX Marathon at the end of the year unless they are also needed for an award like DXCC or WAZ that requires confirmation.

73,

Dave, AA6YQ
--
Jim McPhee
Placitas, NM
W5ABA