Hank,
If we must use only the most "modern" communications modes, then voice
contesting should be immediately discontinued. Voices have been around for
perhaps a million years or more.
Come to think of it, digital isn't so new either. I see monkeys in the zoo
pointing at things and poking each other with their digits as a form of
communications.
Sometimes they augment that digital form of communications by voicing various
squeaks, grunts, and chattering. Guess you could say that "digital voice" is a
very old and primitive method of communications, and we shouldn't consider
further experimentation in that mode.
73, de Hans, K0HB/K7
"Just a boy and his Radio"™
On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Hank Greeb <n8xx@arrl.org> wrote:
> Why is the RTTY Roundup so named?
> If I read the rules, all digital modes should have equal standing, i.e.,
> RTTY (200 Hz or so wide), PSK-31 (30 Hz), BPSK-63 (about 70 Hz), etc.
> Should it not be called the Digital Modes Roundup?
> And, with BPSK being about 67% better than 45 baud RTTY in spectrum
> efficiency, why does the ARRL promote RTTY rather than a more efficient
> mode such as BPSK-63?
> Yes, I know I've heard that PSK-31 operating is like watching paint dry,
> but folks tell me that BPSK-63 is as rapid as 45 baud baudot. So, why
> does the contesting community stick with an early 1900's mode, rather
> than adopting a more spectrum efficient mode?
> If it's because of habit, why aren't we all using sp*rk gap transmitters
> and coherer detectors?
> Just a few questions which came to mind as I was reading the rules for
> the RTTY roundup.
> 72/73 de n8xx Hg
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|