Steve Wilson, G3VMW steve at g3vmw.demon.co.uk
Fri Apr 23 10:39:13 PDT 2010

In message <mailman.29617.1272039494.3373.uk-contest at contesting.com>, 
uk-contest-request at contesting.com writes
>Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 15:08:58 -0000
>From: "Steve GW4BLE" <steve.gw4ble at btconnect.com>
>Subject: Re: [UK-CONTEST] QRM on the PSK freq
>To: <uk-contest at contesting.com>
>Message-ID: <001601cae2f6$e6e8f760$b4bae620$@gw4ble at btconnect.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain;      charset="us-ascii"
>Anyone with me in thinking that PSK should be dropped as a mode from  these
>RSGB Events?
>(please respond to the reflector, so views can be known)


Don't see why?

PSK31 is a data mode and adds a bit of interest to the otherwise fairly 
static CCs, mainly because a bit of strategy is needed to decide when to 
change mode to RTTY and vice-versa.

Like others have reported, the PSK segment around 3580 was pretty noisy 
here last night, but the rules say 3580-3585 for PSK so there was plenty 
of room for everyone. PSK31 works well in poor signal to noise 
situations so there are some transmission advantages. However, it was a 
bit crowded on RTTY because nobody ventured above 3600 despite the rules 
(AFAIK) allowing operation up to 3620.

I admit to liking PSK31 because it is bandwidth efficient and whilst I 
admit it is slower than RTTY for contesting, I still usually manage more 
PSK QSOs than RTTY QSOs. The ratio here was 46 PSK to 37 RTTY last 

What is it about PSK31 that causes the view that it should be dropped 
from the RSGB Data CC events? I genuinely don't see a problem.


Steve Wilson, G3VMW
Bramham, Wetherby, West Yorkshire

More information about the UK-Contest mailing list