Irad, I get your point. Of course the "EMCOMM-mode" is for "real EMCOMM"! I´m not the one who TX EMCOMM - beacons all the day as we can see this these days. VarAc is for daily usage AND EMCOMM. And, in my opinion, that´s the reason why it should save the software´s state. I really don´t like, that after using VarAc once (e.g. in a real emcomm-situation) VarAc changes my "standard-setup" and it remains changed after switcvhing back to standard. I think this is not a very cute behaviour of a software to change something by itself in the background and never come back to that it was before. In my opinion a senseless education-action which will not prevent the wrong usage as we can see on the QRGs these days. I don´t think that this is good and it would be better the software´s state(s) would be stored, Irad. I remember the discussion about the audio-levels we had 1.5 years ago. In that issue I could convince you. Maybe in this issue as well? ;-) As long as VarAc is not able to switch back and forth between "standard" and "EMCOMM" modes without losing settings I´ll stay away of using and recommending VarAc as dedicated EMCOMM-Software in EMCOMM-mode. Think about it again, Irad. 73 de Lenz, DL8RDL

Well I disagree with that... I would prefer saved states. I don´t really know which checkboxes and maybe some more functions are switched by EMCOMM. If that´s not clear and modes do not come back as they were before it´s IMHO not the best concept and I´ll stay in one mode and will not use the EMCOMM.

Finally it´s here! I tried it out and it works like a charm! TNX Irad for taking care of this issue!

Hi Irad, anything new on this requested feature? In my opinion a "must have" when you´d like to run your station with the frequency scheduler. Would it be possible in general or is it difficult because it is not only a "VarAC" issuet but also a "VARA"-issue? 73 de Lenz

This might be but any other software in digi-modes can do it. WSJT, JSCALL, JTDX and so on. It is neccessary because on each band the output differs according to dirfferent audiolevels. Without this feature no "unmanned operation" with frequency schedule is possible. Well now. that is my experience. It´s state of the art to have this. Independent of somebody has requested this or not. In the end your decision but in my opinion a basic feature. 73.

In my opinion the length is not the problem. Just assume that more users (the user-figure increases daily) want to uses the "relay-technique" and there e.g. are 3 mails to transfer. It´s not the length in my eyes - it´s the way how it is handled. I really don´t have an idea how it could be better. Your suggestion mentioned above works but it increases traffic on the calling QRG. 73 de Lenz, DL8RDL

Thanks, Irad!

Usually I do not click the home-button with the mouse. I use the keyboard and press the home button while maybe I type s.th. Logger32 for example uses this feature to bring the cursor to the call-entry-field.

OK, I see that VARA is the limitation. Sorry for coming in with a repeated request

Thanks, Irad! :-)

Hi Irad, I just read your anwer to my suggestion. Of course I thought about that. But my request is to have the possibility setting up more color-variations, custom colors e.g. with RGB-selectors. The reason is that the selectable colors in 5.3.1 are super strong e.g. in saturation and that makes only a very few back- and foreground-combinations actually really good readable. I don´t know, which color selectors are ready to use for programming in windows. But maybe some RGB-selectors are availabe to setup customized colors which would give more variations which are in combination good readable for everybody. I hope I could point out the intention of my request. 73 de Lenz, DL8RDL

That´s a very good place to add! Tnx for considering. 73 de Lenz, DL8RDL

Hi Gary, I think I understood this point before. it´s just reporting and suggesting, giving ideas and thoughts - and not demanding anything. Nothing more. Irad is the author and only he decides what to develop or not. 73 de Lenz

Is this feature active now (5.3.1)? Do I somewhere see the time elapsing?