I am not taking sides in the CW issue but at the same time I do not want to see CW leave as a requirement. None of us truly know if it will help or hurt the hobby. But this is a MAJOR RTTY contest wi
Author: "Inbody, Donald S" <inbody@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:10:47 -0600
I'm not really sure why there is any complaining. Other than intentional jamming, CW signals have never prevented me from making a RTTY QSO, and when operating CW, I can usually close the filter down
John, Obviously you have never been to the Foums section of QRZ.com or eHAM! Both of those are pretty much a waste of time any more since there is basically only one topic of discussion lately. Scott
I agree. This is a product of operators who do not know how to successfully deal with adjacent stations, QRM or QRN on their rig. Maybe a review of the owner?s manual is in order? Unless they are rig
If the CW signal is not much louder and don't have a lot of keyclicks, you can usually copy an RTTY signal through an adjacent CW QRM even when it touches one of the FSK tones. Unless there are two s
Author: "Inbody, Donald S" <inbody@austin.utexas.edu>
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 13:50:30 -0600
Excellent observation. Learning the full capability of your equipment and how to communicate under difficult circumstances is the mark of a good operator. If "arm chair" copy is the only thing one ca
I used it a lot this weekend to keep out those pesky adjacent channel RTTY contesters! Only once did I use it for CW and he was doing the jamming thing... BTW, some fool was trying to chase RTTY cont
Hi John Naw, we just tighten up the filters and keep going :-) 73 Tom W7WHY One thing I have noticed though is that the rtty ops do not complain when that happens. ___________________________________
No kiddin'. The CW folks act as if their best friend was killed. Geez, they can already use CW on every single stinkin' band (in the US, save for 60 m and the 219-220 band), yet they complain about e