Apologies for the provocative title, but the lamenting of PSK31's perceived slowness during the FD festivities prompted me to crunch some actual numbers. The question I thought to investigate was "ho
This ignores the delay at the end of transmissions, which is quite annoying, plus the problem of PSK31 operators adding superfluous information. PSK31 operators, even in PSK31 contests, rarely use as
Yes, it's more of an operator problem than a mode problem... ...and what's with this business of answering CQ's with the exchange attached? This has turned into a real epidemic! Do these people just
Author: "Alejandro V. XE1EE" <xe1ee@telmexmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 09:55:55 -0500
Hello Ty When someone anwers my CQ with his exchange attached, I just ignore them. Happens 2 things: they go or they answer as the normal way. 73! ** XE1EE Alejandro Valdez O. DXCC RTTY, SSB, CW Mixe
Isn't the "real" objection to PSK that is prone to garbling due to multipath? It might be ok for a domestic contest like Field Day, but how about a DX contest? I don't use PSK all that much, but that
I didn't do a contest in PSK from XV but in just DX with a "call 599 call" kind of QSO what I usually got back in PSK was "Thanks for calling. Report: 599........". RTTY folks understand that short f
RTTY can get pretty distorted at times too, but you are right that PSK does not survive polar paths well. _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://
That is correct. When there is no multipath, PSK31 beats out RTTY by a couple of dB, assuming both modes use the same average power. However, as multipath increases, PSK31 errors build up rapidly. Us
Why don't we just invent/introduce some new RTTY standard - the one with 6 bits instead of 5 - covering whole alphabet and digits without any FIGS/LTRS and speed it up a little bit to compensate an e
There is no need to introduce another "mode du jour" even. 7-bit ASCII (CCITT ITA-5) RTTY has been FCC approved (see part 97.309(c)) for a long time now. fldigi supports it, so does MultiPSK and coco
Somebody should set up an ASCII contest. That would be interesting. Paul, N8HM _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailma
Ahem... I think Chen glossed over one important aspect regarding the abandonment of 5-bit Badot... What in the world would all you guys do with those Model 15's and Model 19's that would no longer se
The *BARTG High Speed Sprint* might be an existing (recently introduced) contest to make the transition? 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@
Anybody want to try ASCII? I've never made a QSO. I'm calling CQ at 14.088.5 MHz. Paul, N8HM _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contest
Hi Paul, Any progress? Anybody answered in 30 minutes? K2BB _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
No answers yet. I'm still there. _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
I sometimes feel like PSK operators are in their own little world. They stick to that watering hole around 070 and don't venture outside of it. I was operating a special event call earlier this year.
I sometimes feel like PSK operators are in their own little world. They stick to that watering hole around 070 and don't venture outside of it. I concur! And their insistence to only run 50 watts. 73
Not many run 50 watts unless they have a 200 watt radio. Most PSK is 20 watts and below to preserve audio linearity. de Paul, W8AEF I sometimes feel like PSK operators are in their own little world.