- 1. [RTTY] FD RTTY Question (score: 1)
- Author: "K9OR" <k9or@comcast.net>
- Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 23:16:11 -0500
- After years of slowly but steadily increasing RTTY participation in FD, where was everyone this year? Our RTTY QSO's were about a third what they were a year ago - despite CQ/S&P on 20 and 40 during
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-06/msg00095.html (6,583 bytes)
- 2. Re: [RTTY] FD RTTY Question (score: 1)
- Author: Paul Stoetzer <n8hm@arrl.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 06:04:40 -0400
- The PSK part of 20m was absolutely packed all weekend. I didn't make many Field Day contacts, but that appeared to be where the action is. PSK31 is an utterly unsuitable mode for contesting and it's
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-06/msg00096.html (7,474 bytes)
- 3. Re: [RTTY] FD RTTY Question (score: 1)
- Author: Adrian Engele <aa5uk@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 06:35:48 -0700 (PDT)
- Here at the K9MOT FD site we tried RTTY for the first time and we found the rates were decent. Good enough were we S&P'ed for a while then switched to SSB and then CW; then back to RTTY. This kept a
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-06/msg00097.html (8,681 bytes)
- 4. Re: [RTTY] FD RTTY Question (score: 1)
- Author: k3mm@verizon.net
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 11:07:47 -0500 (CDT)
- Unfortunately, the answer to your question at the bottom is yes....and not the fast PSK63 either, the slow PSK31. It's aggravating but true. I try to do as much RTTY as possible early in the 24 hour
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-06/msg00098.html (8,758 bytes)
- 5. Re: [RTTY] FD RTTY Question (score: 1)
- Author: Dick Kriss <aa5vu@att.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:20:22 -0500
- QSL on the comments about PSK-31 vs. RTTY. I tried to use PSK-31 and it was just too slow and very frustrating where RTTY worked great. I noticed a big increase in the number of FD stations running R
- /archives//html/RTTY/2012-06/msg00101.html (8,836 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu