Okay Bill, from the top this is how it started, you said in part:
"As I recall, after the High Speed Sprints of the 1990's, the general
consensus was there were too many errors caused by propagation
vagaries. 45 baud simply prints better in most cases."
Although you were asked, you have not provided any proof of your statement
"the general consensus was..." I provided proof there was not ONE mention of
"too many errors" by the participants of the HSS contests. BTW, the soapbox
comments I quoted were posted on the public WF1B-RTTY reflector, not in any
logs. If there were any discussion about error rates, I would have captured
that along with these other reports because this aspect was a serious
consideration.
Your statement that "45 baud simple prints better in most cases" is a broad
brushed statement that needs to be challenged as well. If this were true,
why were commercial teleprinter links using higher baud rates on their HF
links?
Your statements come across like an authoritative source. Yes, I am
challenging them! Why shouldn't I when they are based on a wrong
recollection and embellished with personal bias?
And finally, Bill, I did not call you a liar. You added that on your own. So
don't go putting words into my messages. I first said your recollection was
wrong. That doesn't make you a liar. Second, I said don't manufacture
statements as if they were facts just because you think that's the way it
should be. This is what historical revisionist are known to do.
I'm done with this.
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill, W6WRT" <dezrat1242@yahoo.com>
To: "Robert Chudek - K0RC" <k0rc@citlink.net>
Cc: "RTTY Reflector" <rtty@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 5:25 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] 100 baud RTTY
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 15:32:31 -0600, "Robert Chudek - K0RC"
<k0rc@citlink.net> wrote:
>
>What I have issue with is Bill's statement that "the consensus was"
>regarding operating higher speeds than 45 baud. I agree theoretically the
>error rate should be higher, especially when you don't have the extra 4 dB
>of signal margin over the noise.
REPLY:
What I meant by "consensus" was that 100% of the folks who commented
on the error rate issue found HS to be more error prone. I do not
recall anyone who said it was just as good or better than 45.45 baud.
That sounds like "consensus" to me. :-)
And of course, your soapbox comments were not the only comments made.
I, for one, almost never turn in soapbox comments with my scores but I
often do post comments on the RTTY reflector. My two calls which I
held in the 1990's (W7LZP, W7TI) do not appear in your soapbox, but I
did indeed make comments elsewhere. I am sure there are others who
did the same. In plain English, your list of comments is incomplete.
And finally, noise floor is not the only issue with HS. Phase shift
caused my multipath and flutter may be even more significant is some
cases. An amount of phase shift which is harmless to 45.45 baud may
completely clobber 100 baud. It all depends.
I have been using the internet and RTTY for at least 15 years. Your
post was the first that ever called me a flat-out liar.
I await your apology.
73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|