Version 1.9.0 didn’t last long - 1.9.1 was released 2 hours ago.
as it looks like the release notes haven’t been updated since V 1.9.0RC4, you need to check yourself to see if the points regarding non-standard call signs you requested to be changed have been included Walt.
No, they have not. The release notes have now been published and the latest update merely fixes a bug in the unnecessary “DX-pedition Mode”. I have no interest in that. People are already misusing it to make 3 or 4 simultaneous QSOs in an already overcrowded sub-band.
Ok, thanks, i have the later version now as well - as you say a disappointment - but what you were asking for was not the change in 1.9.0 titled “Fox can now work Hounds using compound callsigns.” was it? Or is that the wrong way around.
In any case, if that’s what you were looking for it sounds like the problem may have been fixed in the DXPedition mode but not in the normal mode !
It has been explained ad nausium why there is a limit to call sign variations in the WSJT programs. If people want to flout international convention and use peculiar call signs then thats their decision. WSJT works so well because of its rigid structure. To expect the program to cope with every strange combo of letters and numbers now used for special events is unrealistic.
There is a free text program that has nearly the same performance as FT8 but you must use a particular frequency on 40 m.
The ITU rules regarding the structure of amateur radio callsigns are very clearly explained here:
The callsign GB60OT which I was using at the end of May is not a “peculiar callsign” and it most certainly does not “flout international convention”.
The breakdown of the callsign is as follows:
6 Separating numeral
0OT Suffix (That’s Zero O T)
All are perfectly in compliance with ITU standards, but the callsign as allocated by Ofcom would not work properly with WSJT-X.
The flaw in the software is that it does not recognise that a suffix can legitimately contain numerals as well as letters. Paradoxically, it would accept “GB6OOT” but not “GB60OT”. I find it hard to believe that it would be difficult to correct this simple error.
It depends on whether the software expects numbers in what has been decided to be letters only. If you make the assumption that all calls after the separating numeral are made of letters, you can assume a numeric is an error.
That doesn’t make the assumptions valid, but may explain why it’s not a simple fix.
As you discovered that call did not comply with the format allowed by WSJT. By definition then it is odd. It may be legal but it is a “special” and there are not enough coding bits to do all the specials. FT8 will never do all possible specials.
Detailed reasons have been given by Joe elsewhere. Read the manual if you want a summary.
I’ve got so sick of the blather on various FT8 fora that I now rarely use the mode especially if all I can see are US and UK stations.