RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests

To: <lists@subich.com>, "'RTTY Reflector'" <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests
From: "Jeff Blaine AC0C" <keepwalking188@yahoo.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2009 01:46:10 -0500
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Joe,

Humans are not optimized to climb Everest.  They do it for the challenge - 
to see if, despite the challenges, it can be done.

So if a guy wants to bang his head against the multi-path wall trying to 
work a 160m WAS, well, it's a semi-free country, right?  After all, seems 
that's what all that 'pursuit of happiness' stuff is about...

73/jeff/ac0c

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 01, 2009 12:44 AM
To: "'RTTY Reflector'" <rtty@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests

>
>
>> On Oct 31, 2009, at 6:29 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
>>
>> > REPLY:
>> >
>> > Absolute nonsense. Anyone who has spent much time actually
>> > operating 160 meter RTTY knows it works just fine. This is
>> > one canard that should die a quick and merciful death.
>
> There goes Bill again ... writing what he "wishes" were true
> without any understanding of the physics behind the subject
> and ignoring the experts in the field.  45 baud, 170 Hz FSK
> has a well established minimum SNR that is not often met on
> long haul (more than groundwave or NVIS) medium wave paths.
> In addition, "RTTY" is very sensitive to the very kind of
> multipath distortion common on medium waves.  Simply put.
> RTTY as amateurs know it is not useful for much more than
> local or limited regional QSOs on 160 meters and is certainly
> not suited to international contesting.
>
> If there was a real interest in digital mode communication
> at medium waves, the push would be for system using low baud
> rates, multiple closely spaced tones and a robust coding that
> would work with signal to noise ratios approaching 0 dB with
> multipath delays in excess of 10 to 15 msec.
>
> Absent interest in an MW optimized protocol, calls for
> increased RTTY activity, particularly contesting on 160
> meters are nothing more than intentional and destructive
> interference to other users of the band.
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> 

_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>