ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Sat, 31 Oct 2009 11:35:18 -0500, Phil Sussman <psussman@pactor.com> wrote:
>I vote for Chen -- his explanation for 160m operation is not
>emotional and makes much sense.
REPLY:
I have heard over and over that "160 is not suitable for RTTY" with every kind
of explanation you can imagine, mostly centering on selective fading and
multipath distortion of some kind. Not one of these statements comes from
dedicated 160 RTTY ops because they know better.
I suspect much of this attitude comes from long ago when a RTTY demodulator had
to have both the MARK and SPACE tones present to print correctly. Modern
software decoders are much better at decoding when one tone or the other is weak
or missing - the result of selective fading. Some software such as RiTTY by
K6STI is capable of correctly decoding even when only one tone is present and
the other has completely faded out. Brian calls this the "flywheel effect" in
his software and it works. Other software writers should strive to emulate
Brian.
Anyway, my experience is just the opposite. If I can hear 'em I can work 'em,
just like any other band. 160 is fun - give it a try!
73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|