On Thu, 28 Jan 1999 08:15:23 -0800 Rich Measures <measures@vc.net>
writes:
>
>
>
>>
>>At 11:15 AM 1/28/99 -0000, Peter Chadwick wrote:
>>>
>>>>Given the fact that cw is far more spectrum efficient
>>>
>>>It isn't. Spectrum efficiency is bits/Hz.
>>>
>>>HF packet is about 0.1 bits/Hz. HF CW is about 10bits/sec, and
>needs about
>>>50Hz to allow for fading etc, so is about 0.2 bits/Hz. Analogue
>speech is
>>>often reckoned as about 2 bits/Hz.
>>>
>>>CW is inherently narrow band, not spectrally efficient.
>>>
>>
>>OK Point Taken...But that still doesn't change my arguement...What I
>meant
>>to convey is that far more cw signals can be accomodated in the same
>>frequency spectrum as SSB signals.
>>
>? However, voice communication proceeds at around 250wpm and cw at
>maybe 25wpm. It seems to me that for contesting, cw is better
Top Gun SSB contesters have much higher Q rates than CW counterparts.
Fact, not fiction.
73 Carl KM1H
>
>
>Rich...
>
>R. L. Measures, 805-386-3734, AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
>Submissions: amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
>
___________________________________________________________________
You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ampfaq.html
Submissions: amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests: amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-amps@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|