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.
73 Ed.
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.
73,
Walt (G3NYY)
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 !
73 Ed.
So is that the club for the “G? … G4? … G4? … UR 599 TU” brigade? I’m not sure that’s much better than FT8.
No thank you, Richard. I am already a member of the Second Class Operators Club (SOC). That will be sufficient! 
73,
Walt (G3NYY) SOC #364
Now Walt, that is most definitely the club for me. 
Hi Walt
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.
No free lunches Walt.
Ron
VK3AFW
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:
GB Prefix
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.
73,
Walt (G3NYY)
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.
Hi Walt
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.
73
Ron
VK3AFW
Looks like FT8 might support SOTA activations a little better in the future:
Good news for Walt (and others)
Excellent news.
I noticed someone on FT8 operating for a while with a /M suffix. So I guessed /P might be, in a way, possible, and tried it myself.
It is indeed possible, but I soon realised the limitations. Because (at present) WSJT-X cannot understand or handle /P, it doesn’t see it. So if calling CQ as M1EYP/P, if someone replies, they reply to M1EYP. The consequence of this is that the autosequenced QSO is not launched; the activator needs to keep his eye on the left hand window for incoming calls, and manually select and launch the QSO sequence.
So it is possible, but it’s not slick - or indeed much fun. I swiftly went back to using just “M1EYP” and trusted the SOTA chasers to know that it was really M1EYP/P on the summit. As for the non-SOTA chasers - well, who cares?
But this development will eradicate WSJT-X’s most obvious and irritating deficiency. That pleases me, because I enjoy activating via WSJT surprisingly greatly. I’ll tell you what though, despite suggestions to the contrary, CW is still MUCH faster and MUCH more effective! Then again, with the WSJT upgrades, the possibility opens up for the SOTA activator to explore the potential of DXpedition mode… 
M1EYP,
I live up in Alaska and have been looking into running portable digital modes as a way of getting more mileage out of my 5 watts since I don’t run CW. I’m experimenting with psk31 via tablet, but am also considering FLdigi or WSJT via a raspberry pi. Would you mind answering some questions on your activation setup and experiences off-list? I have an @ arrl.net email address.
Thanks,
Brandon Clark, KL7BSC
NP, my email is good on QRZ.com, or you can use the PM facility on here. But why not open a thread about equipment for SOTA activating on Datamodes, and discuss it there for everyone’s benefit?
Whatever way, over to you…
Hi Tom,
It depends on what you mean by effective. CW requires less gear and you can complete a QSO in 15 seconds but you have to be able to hear the other station to work them and vice versa. With FT8 and several other digital modes you can easily work stations you can’t hear. That’s why you carry the extra gear and accept a slower QSO rate. FT8 is probably not going to be popular on SOTA in EU and the US because there are so many chasers within range even with poor propagation.
The new version of FT8 won’t cater for SOTA as the development team are more interested in NA contests and odd-ball callsigns. It is in theory possible that some bright programmer could hack the new version and make it SOTA/IOTA/POTA friendly.
We do the best we can with imperfect tools. For example you can send your SOTA peak in the13 character free text message. The proposed new text messaging will allow a little more.
73
Ron
VK3AFW
Hi Ron, talking of some bright programmers - have you seen this other thread here:
This sounds interesting, if it to a certain extent can add a more “conversational” mode while taking advantage of the low signal resolution, this could be a very useful tool to add as an option alongside other modes while on a summit. Now if someone would write a version for smartphones … That’s asking a lot at the moment so I guess a windows tablet and a good sun shade will be needed…
73 Ed.
Hi ed,
Thanks, I hadn’t seen that. A ZL has previously written a brilliant conversational QSO program with sensitivity and bandwidth similar to FT8. It was over run by the Americans taking up FT8. One drawback of the ZL program was a requirement to use a particular 40 m frequency. I think that was to avoid the software having to search for a signal and so the author could see how it was going but that was an inhibitor for me. It probably would work on any number of specified frequencies as the program would only see the audio tones. Maybe it still has a future but its harder for a ZL to nominate band frequencies and have them taken up than if a K/W does it.
I’ll continue with FT8 for the present.
73
Ron
VK3AFW
Effective - in the context of making QSOs as an activator on a summit. That is all.
All I need it to do, is allow me to be M1EYP/P instead of M1EYP, and still have access to the autolaunch and sequencing of QSOs. It would appear from the news that this will now be possible. I already send my SOTA reference in the free message, instead of the “73” message. So that would now look pretty SOTA compatible to me.
Hi Tom
If you call CQ as M1EYP/P the first response from the other station will address you as that and you will be logged by them with the /P.
I note you are prone to activating after a gig and hence sometimes on a summit post UTC rollover. Tomorrow there will be numerous VK and ZL stations actively seeking SOTA contacts so if you are about an alert might net you a few interesting QSO’s.
73
Ron
VK3AFW