Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:chen@mac.com: 990 ]

Total 990 documents matching your query.

181. Re: [RTTY] Sound Cards (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 17:29:35 -0700
On Jul 20, 2004, at 3:56 PM, N6OJ wrote: Can anybody tell me if there is a difference in demodulation quality between the $29.95 special sound card and the $500.00 super sound card I have compared th
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00218.html (9,401 bytes)

182. Re: [RTTY] Friend files (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 18:13:33 -0700
On Jul 20, 2004, at 5:46 PM, roofus wrote: I have not gotten around to playing with them yet but most contests seem to be aimed at speed and saying HI DICK would slow things down. Are they used for c
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00221.html (7,674 bytes)

183. Re: [RTTY] RE: no rtty ops in Delaware (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:23:21 -0700
On Jul 21, 2004, at 1:46 PM, Peter Laws wrote: WA3GGM was gracious enough to work me as well after my plea here. Likewise W8WEJ for WV. Got N1MGO in VT on the weekend, so all I need is Montana as wel
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00233.html (7,934 bytes)

184. Re: [RTTY] Friend files (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:53:48 -0700
On Jul 21, 2004, at 2:27 PM, Barry wrote: Guys I don't know say "Hi Barry" to me. At first, it made me wonder if this is someone I do or should know, The gems are when you call a station and instead
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00235.html (7,588 bytes)

185. Re: [RTTY] Montana (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2004 00:07:58 -0700
On Jul 21, 2004, at 8:42 PM, Jim Reisert AD1C wrote: here is the list of MT stations I have worked: W7ECA June, 1999 N7MNY January, 2000 K7VK January, 2000 W7WK January, 2001 I had also worked the sa
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00244.html (7,233 bytes)

186. [RTTY] VVVVV (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 13:29:06 -0700
For those who are mystified by printing bunches of V's in the middle of a QSO, I think I have stumbled on the root cause. I happened to be implementing a modem with multiple simultaneous ATC (adaptiv
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-07/msg00272.html (7,510 bytes)

187. Re: [RTTY] QSL Info for XU7ABN (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Aug 2004 12:09:40 -0700
AA5VU writes I can understand and appreciate the mail and other issues XU7ABN may have with QSL cards that explains the NO QSL PLEASE, NO QSL...!!! message. Have no fear, XU on RTTY are not that rare
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00005.html (7,634 bytes)

188. Re: [RTTY] Re: AFSK/FSK etc (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:22:10 -0700
On Aug 12, 2004, at 8:53 AM, Phil Cooper wrote: However, I am willing to bet a huge number of entrants do NOT know, and I bet some don't even know the terms mark and space, let alone whether they are
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00111.html (9,730 bytes)

189. [RTTY] XU7ABN QSL (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2004 11:16:48 -0700
This is what I just copied at 14087.3 (good signal, CQ'ing with not many takers). Claude explains his QSL policy. K7LLC DE XU7ABN NEW QSL POLICY NO BUREAU,NO MANAGER, IF YOU REALLY,ABSOLUTELY,WANTIMY
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00130.html (6,822 bytes)

190. [RTTY] 14085 (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2004 17:16:30 -0700
I am here watching 14085.5 at 0010z. Now and then someone will come on to say the contest is over, but the gentleman keeps CQing for SARTG contacts. What is funnier is that there are people exchangin
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00169.html (6,285 bytes)

191. Re: [RTTY] AA5AU SARTG SOAB LP (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2004 12:13:58 -0700
On Aug 22, 2004, at 10:56 AM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote: Two big surprises. The first was working HS72B on 20 meters. That's usually impossible using low power from here, let alone in the middle of the da
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00180.html (7,826 bytes)

192. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:27:09 -0700
On Aug 24, 2004, at 9:35 AM, W0YR@aol.com wrote: So, an S9 FSK signal has no unwanted garbage (aside from key clicks). Unless your rig happens to be a "keyed FSK" rig, such as the FT-990, FT-1000D, F
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00233.html (10,360 bytes)

193. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 11:53:26 -0700
On Aug 24, 2004, at 11:18 AM, VE3XD wrote: So the question is whether it's worth the effort to make the switch. I have done very well in the past with AFSK. I have got to wonder whether anyone has ev
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00235.html (9,201 bytes)

194. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 19:24:52 -0700
On Aug 24, 2004, at 5:44 PM, Phil Duff NA4M wrote: I see no adjustment for FSK/AFSK drive level in RTTY mode to have no ALC indication. In "RTTY" mode, you are stuck at what the factory setting is. T
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00243.html (9,724 bytes)

195. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:14:49 -0700
On Aug 24, 2004, at 9:23 PM, Bill Turner wrote: I would be wary of trying to narrow the RTTY signal by reducing the sidebands. RTTY is a form of FM (think of a carrier modulated by a square wave) and
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00253.html (10,660 bytes)

196. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 00:44:21 -0700
On Aug 24, 2004, at 9:23 PM, Bill Turner wrote: Any edition of the ARRL handbook has a good explanation of the FM sideband phenomenon and all RTTY ops should read same. No need to look very far back
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00255.html (8,922 bytes)

197. Re: [RTTY] Distortion (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 10:43:15 -0700
On Aug 25, 2004, at 9:14 AM, Dave Hachadorian wrote: On afsk, one thing you have to be very careful of is rf getting into the transmitted audio. How very true. Just last weekend, I was trying to call
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00264.html (8,528 bytes)

198. Re: [RTTY] Fw: ARLB025 ARRL seeks comment on draft"Bandwidth" petition (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 18:59:20 -0700
On Aug 25, 2004, at 5:48 PM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote: I read this as a good thing. Anyone else? The lower .xxx are moderately confusing: .580 for 80m, .035 for 40m, .065 for 20m, .080 for 15m and .050 f
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00279.html (9,520 bytes)

199. Re: [RTTY] Fw: ARLB025 ARRL seeks comment on draft"Bandwidth" petition (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:16:00 -0700
On Aug 25, 2004, at 6:13 PM, Bill Turner wrote: One alternative would be to try using narrower shifts on RTTY, perhaps on the order of 50 Hz or so. There are some technical reasons why this is not a
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00282.html (9,378 bytes)

200. Re: [RTTY] Fw: ARLB025 ARRL seeks comment ondraft "Bandwidth" petition (score: 1)
Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 19:30:35 -0700
On Aug 25, 2004, at 7:07 PM, Doug Faunt N6TQS +1-510-655-8604 wrote: Maybe we should ask for .065 (or maybe .070) as the lower limit for 500Hz BW on 15 and 10, as well as on 20, just to make things e
/archives//html/RTTY/2004-08/msg00284.html (9,242 bytes)

Current List: 181 - 200
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20]
This search system is powered by Namazu