Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+RTTY\s+Digest\,\s+Vol\s+102\,\s+Issue\s+5\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+RTTY\s+Digest\,\s+Vol\s+102\,\s+Issue\s+5\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] RTTY Digest, Vol 102, Issue 5 (score: 1): Author: RLVZ@aol.com; Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 17:56:58 EDT; The DIGI-FEST... had a very nice name but very poor turn out. I was hoping to put in serious hours but the poor turn out caused me to lose interest and drop out. I made aprx. 25 RTTY q's and 50 BPSK; /archives//html/RTTY/2011-06/msg00019.html (9,964 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Digest, Vol 102, Issue 5 (score: 1): Author: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 15:30:24 -0700; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: REPLY: If you want a real hoot, crank MMTTY up to 300 baud. It doesn't sound like RTTY at all, more like a buzz saw. I've never made a Q at 300 but I'd be willing to try if anyone w; /archives//html/RTTY/2011-06/msg00020.html (7,098 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Digest, Vol 102, Issue 5 (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 16:50:42 -0700; You might want to broaden the shift a little if you want to do FSK at 300 baud; perhaps use 200 Hz shift like the HF Packet guys? 300 baud with a 170 Hz shift is a higher baud/shift ratio even than w; /archives//html/RTTY/2011-06/msg00021.html (7,344 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Digest, Vol 102, Issue 5 (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2011 17:01:22 -0700; Whoops, sorry. 300 baud at 170 Hz shift is *lower* than the MSK limit. An MSK signal that looks like 170 Hz shift would have a baud rate of 340. 73 Chen, W7AY ________________________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2011-06/msg00022.html (7,189 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]