[CQ-Contest] Fwd: Why?
hs0zcw at gmail.com
Fri Jan 9 17:06:27 EST 2015
There are parts of the world where ham spectrum space is NOT a problem.
Without a major contest I can tune ALL bands under 2m and hear ONE ham
contacting activity per band ... all over 9 bands, average.
You guys stuck in NA or EU should one day have the experience of tuning
over all of 20meters during any 20 of 24 hours and NOT hearing any ham sigs
at all. Rcvr selectivity is low priority in HS. 73 Charly
On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 12:15 AM, Ward Silver <hwardsil at gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't the issue is as much about spectrum efficiency or channel
> characteristics as it is of the session-level protocol for RTTY and PSK31,
> for which there really isn't one. Both are "connection-less" protocols
> that don't require any kind of set-up and tear-down of a protocol structure
> before data is exchanged. Characters are typed, out they go, and anyone
> can receive them or respond to them without negotiation. That's what you
> need for a contest environment. If you are talking about data transfer -
> that's a completely different problem.
> 73, Ward N0AX
> On 1/9/2015 11:00 AM, cq-contest-request at contesting.com wrote:
>> How can we entice a sufficient number of contest ops "pack the bands" in
>> a contest using BPSK (31 or 63) to determine if the bandwidth advantages
>> for PSK outweigh the disadvantages concerning multi-path distortion, etc.?
>> 72/73 de n8xx Hg
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
More information about the CQ-Contest