> RTTY/Digital - no modes that are capable of receiving below 0 SNR
Who is using JT65 in a RTTY contest??? That seems like an utter waste of time.
73
Ria, N2RJ
On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 9:11 AM, RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>On Sunday, June 11, 2017 9:43 AM, N4ZR <n4zr@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>OK - so where is our "bright line"? I've been arguing the need for a
>>consensus on this for a decade.
>>
>>I hope nobody will consider me a Luddite - Iwrote arguably the first
>>computer contest logger with integrated CW (for the TRS-80 Model 100 and
>>Commodore 64) back in the 1970s, and I'm one of the founders of the RBN.
>>
>
>
>>CW and SSB - all decoding and transcription of transmissions to be done >by
>>use of a human brain. Yes, I know this "discriminates" against
>>people who don't know CW, but it's a small price to pay to prevent the
>>advent of truecontesting robots.
>
>
> This of course also eliminates the current assisted classes because of
> Skimmer. And if it has to be the entrant's own brain, then it eliminates dx
> clusters since there someone else copies the callsign.
>
>>RTTY/Digital - no modes that are capable of receiving below 0 SNR
>
>
> I don't see this as workable. One problem is that SNR depends more strongly
> on the 'N' (local noise) and how good your antennas are. There are also very
> real physics limits to what SNR can be achieved. You can lower SNR, but at
> the same time you must increase the length of the qso and at some point it is
> not worth waiting for a contest qso when others are available. We are already
> seeing these limits- the most sensitive digital modes (for example WSPR) are
> not used in contesting.
>
> Tor
>
> N4OGW
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|