[RTTY] Decoder performance on crowded bands

[Anthony (N2KI)]

Enjoying the thread.  Not a skimmer user but this explains a lot of spots
in Logger + that indicated call signs on frequencies that were not actually
there.  I couldn't understand it, but now it makes perfect sense.

Thanks for all the Q's


Regards,

Anthony (N2KI)






On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 9:24 PM, Rick Davenport <KI1G at verizon.net> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I was using WinTelnetx as my Telnet interface, i had multiple skimmer
> windows as well as standard cluster windows funneling a ton of spots into
> Writelog. It didnt take long to notice the skimmer issue with non CQing
> stations being spotted. Definitely taking a drink from the firehose.
>
> As the weekend progressed I would alternate turning off the skimmer inputs
> which would fill my bandmap with actual CQing stations that could be worked.
>
> Later in the contest when I turned the skimmers inputs back on, the same
> problem existed but I noticed trends with needed multipliers being
> displayed. I could watch the skimmers track certain stations as they moved
> up or down the band, pay attention to the trend and call CQ about 5 khz
> from the last spot freq and bingo, they would call in like clockwork. This
> makes me think that the issue is related more to what the S&P station is
> doing in their macros than what the running station is doing.
>
> There were others like CV4C that I spent alot of time chasing but could
> never find. This station was on the skimmers what seems like a couple dozen
> times but was never calling CQ. Once again I think the issue is with
> his/her macros and not the running stations.
>
> Skimmers have definitely brought new meaning to the term " Single Op
> Distracted".
>
> Thanks for all the Q's
>
> 73,
> Rick KI1G
>
> > On Sep 30, 2015, at 8:54 PM, Jeff AC0C <keepwalking188 at ac0c.com> wrote:
> >
> > A very very good thing indeed...
> >
> > 73/jeff/ac0c
> > www.ac0c.com
> > alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: Bill Turner Sent: Wednesday, September
> 30, 2015 7:17 PM To: RTTY Reflector Subject: Re: [RTTY] Decoder performance
> on crowded bands
> > ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
> >
> >> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:06:25 -0700, you wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Why do RTTY ops even put a "cq" at the end of their cq message?
> >>
> >> CW ops never put a CQ at the end (except for a few newbie converts from
> RTTY).  45 Baud RTTY is 60 wpm, a lot faster than contest CW, so it's not
> like we had to wait so long for the call sign that we forgot that it was a
> CQ.
> >>
> >> Since RTTY Skimmers are increasingly powerful and popular, and are
> getting confused by the cq at the end, maybe it's time to just drop that
> final cq.
> >>
> >> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
> >> Yuma, AZ
> >
> > REPLY:
> >
> > It's not a case of "forgetting" that it was a CQ. It's a case of
> > tuning across a station and getting only "...W6WRT W6WRT"
> > The question is is W6WRT CQing or S&Ping? Can't tell, and so you have
> > to wait for another transmission.
> > On the other hand, If you hear "...W6WRT W6WRT CQ" there is no doubt
> > and you can answer immediately.
> > And of course, it's not just RTTY. CW contesters often add "TEST" at
> > the end of their CQ's for the same reason. Likewise, SSB'ers add
> > "CONTEST".
> > As Martha says "It's a good thing".  :-)
> >
> > 73, Bill W6WRT
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>