[RTTY] (no subject)

[Bill, W6WRT]

ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:46:13 -0400 (EDT), Gedking at aol.com wrote:

>Why is everybody hung up on FSK when The  AFSK signal  leaving  the Ant is 
>the same and the  receiving end don't know the difference???

REPLY:

Once the hardware is set up, FSK is virtually foolproof, whereas AFSK requires
regular monitoring of drive level to avoid overdriving the TX, especially when
changing bands. Also, some older and/or low cost transceivers can not switch in
a narrow receiving filter in AFSK mode. 

In fairness, AFSK does have some advantages. You can use both AFC and NET at the
same time which enables one-click tuning when using a waterfall. It also allows
a skimmer-like operation when using a very wide bandwidth. 

Neither mode is perfect, but given a choice most old timers seem to prefer FSK
if their transceiver is capable of it. Opinions will differ (to say the least). 

73, Bill W6WRT