On Feb 22, 2007, at 5:48 AM, Shelby Summerville wrote:
> Point, well taken. I had, previously, given this some thought, as both
> CW/SSB NAQP allow contacts, on 160. I do have some concerns, but I
> will
> discuss this, in more detail, with NCJ Editor, K9LA, at Dayton, and
> post the
> results of our discussion. Sorry for not getting an answer, sooner,
> but I
> prefer to discuss "important stuff", in person, not on the phone,
> or email!
I realise this is somewhat contentious.
However, one point. At the current sunspot low, with the MUFs about
as low as they get, the multipath distortion present on 160m will be
at its minimum. Although QRN will still be a problem, this would make
45 baud RTTY the most practical on 160m. That won't be true in 3-4
years.
Then again, 10m was virtually useless to NAQP operators the last
couple of years....
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASEL Mail: aa4lr@arrl.net
Quote: "Not within a thousand years will man ever fly!"
-- Wilbur Wright, 1901
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|