I was very much interested in seeing the statistics that are available at: http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/rtty/2008-June/025760.html Can you please tell me if w9ol selectively works LoTW users
Hi Joe, Looks like ARRL are incrementally seeing the light. I've included my recommendation for how we can send the 170 Hz shift / 45.45 baud RTTY we all know and love, and adhere to the FCC/NTIA req
In my previous post (below) I omitted a comma in the tone frequency list. The corrected line is: [ComboList] Mark=2125,2000,1700,1445,1415,1275,1170,1000,915,660 73 Kai, KE4PT _______________________
Why would you want to ban 45.45 baud 170 Hz shift RTTY by suggesting a "100 Hz or less" bandwidth rule?? The occupied bandwidth [ITU-R and FCC definitions] of RTTY is 250 Hz, greater than that of JT6
Joe I agree that the 2800 Hz BW now on the table is way too much, except for the 60 m band channels for which that specific 2800 Hz rule was written. The current FCC rules for below 10m band (except
Hi Chen The Henning Harmuth story was really interesting. I've run into his works during my tenure with Ultra Wideband and IEEE802 standards work. And folks worry here about 2.8 kHz BW signals! Thank
Hi Salvo, With all respect, and I don't want to criticize you but, when you say "ARRL body it's the same that denied the existence of RTTY by itself for the DXCC" you are of course referring to an ex
Hi Bill, Two issues here I guess. One is ARRL awards -- DXCC is limited to just three unique but broad modulation formats: CW, Phone, Digital on a plethora of combinations of bands. I think you have
John, Tom, I plotted 30 deg relative from NYC, and 90 deg relative GW. The two bearings cross near the southern tip of India, but could be a transmitter in Afghanistan, northern Iran, Iraq, Ukaine ..
I've collected and plotted the great circle bearings to the intruder on 14.240, RTTY from several stations. Please see: http://timederivative.com/KE4PT/intruder/Intruder-20m-RTTY.jpg Bearings take wi
Final graphic: http://timederivative.com/KE4PT/intruder/Intruder-20m-RTTY.jpg Thanks. 73 Kai, KE4PT Thank you Tom KA2D IARU R1 monitoring located the signal in Moscow: http://www.iarums-r1.org/iarums
The theoretical bandwidth of 170 Hz shift 45.45 baud RTTY is just under 250 Hz. 73 Kai, KE4PT The -6 dB bandwidth of the INRAD "300 Hz" filter is shown as 340 Hz which is slightly less than the theor
Absolutely incorrect. Consult ITU-R SM.1138: BW = 2M + 2DK; D=shift/2; M = Baud/2 K = 1.2 (typically) BWrtty=2M+2DK = Baud + shift*1.2 =249.5 Hz If you consider the effect of the 33 ms (1.5 bit) stop
Hi David, Update of my previous answer ... For reference, the specs for the Collins 300 and 500 Hz filter used with FT-857D and FT-817 are at: http://www.rockwellcollins.com/Capabilities_and_Markets/
The RTTY elements are either 22 ms (bits and start bit) or between 22 and 44 ms (1 to 2 stop bit lengths), usually 33 ms (1.5 bit lengths).. I've never heard of a half bit length tone (11 ms) sent in
Or as is oft quipped, "In Theory, theory and practice are the same, in Practice, they are not!" -Kai, KE4PT de Paul, W8AEF ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) REPLY: Jay has summed it up well. Practic
Yes this is good practical advise. Remember also that whether you employ a 300, 500 Hz or even 2.8 kHz filter in the radio, the FINAL filtering is software-implemented in your RTTY demodulator softwa
Hi John, "clyde" is 'interesting' in Morse, and it has the dreaded "de" that causes so much heartburn for RTTY contesters! 73, Kazimierz, KE4PT [ I go by "Kai"] On 10/3/2013 8:40 AM, john wrote: try
For the same transmitter PEP, JT65 outperforms RTTY by about 29 dB (a power ratio of 800). That will make a big difference on 160 m. 73 Kai, KE4PT Rick - WU6W ORIGINAL MESSAGE: (may be snipped) There
Kind folks, For LOTW skeds for WAS-TPA or anything else: http://www.obriensweb.com/sked/index.php?board=lotw 73 Kai, KE4PT k0bx@arrl.net I am retired so I can meet anytime. Joe K0BX Honor Roll RTTY S