Mail Archive Search: <+from:k1mk@alum.mit.edu>

Results:

References: [ +from:k1mk@alum.mit.edu: 38 ]

Total 38 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [RTTY] uh, what about spectrum? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 07:44:27 -0500; The petition for rulemaking <http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6518181567> defines bandwidth to be the necessary bandwidth as that term is defined in Part; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00382.html (7,443 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] uh, what about spectrum? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 15:03:46 -0500 (EST); In this case what's important is that necessary bandwith (as this term is defined elsewhere in the FCC rules) is the bandwidth that appears in the table of authorized modes under the proposed rules.; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00395.html (9,379 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] uh, what about spectrum? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 22:16:17 -0500; Maintaining it is covered by a different rule. that would cause one's signal to exceed the necessary bandwidth are not presently allowed and nothing being proposed would change that. §97.307(a); /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00403.html (10,069 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] Narrow RTTY (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:51:51 -0500; For non-coherent FSK, the minimum shift that will give orthogonality is a shift equal to the baud rate. Orthogonality (very loosely speaking) means that the nulls of the keying sidebands of the mark; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00410.html (9,294 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] The SO1R/SO2R debate (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 09:08:14 -0400; This debate seems to be getting longer and more strident each time; must be the lack of sunspots. :-) If what's desired is information from self-reporting, 3830 already provides that. Self-declared S; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00354.html (9,526 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] Two sides (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:45:28 -0400; Won't the same thing happen (or has happened) when newbies realize some of the other "truths" about contesting? The current instance of the SO1R vs. SO2R debate was kicked off by noting that the NAQP; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00376.html (9,737 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 17:34:04 -0400; Joe, I don't think that's entirely accurate. It's been a somewhat different story for each genre of contest. Even a long-established CW/phone contest like ARRL Nov Sweepstakes didn't add a low power; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00398.html (8,629 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] SO2R vs. SO1R - a pertinent question (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 23:52:05 -0400; At least 40 years? Perhaps for some modes or in some contests. But for CQWW RTTY as one example, a separate low power category was added in 1993. That seems more like recent memory than a fact of lif; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-07/msg00431.html (9,023 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] Fwd: [digitalradio] RTTY Hall of Shame (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 10:39:21 -0400; Band plans, including the IARU's, are not written in stone (or into rule). To quote from the ARRL "white paper" on contesting best practices (<http://www.arrl.org/contests/hf-faq.html>): "5c) Band pl; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-09/msg00172.html (11,273 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] FW: Slightly off topic, history of 850 Hz shift? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 13:55:51 -0400; If I recall correctly, the frequencies of the standard audio tones were taken from the Western Electric/Bell standards developed for multiplex landline teletype which predated radio-teletype by years; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-09/msg00222.html (9,521 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] Still problems with robot (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 10:03:22 -0400; Hi Peter, Report this one to Paolo I2UIY (i2uiy@cqww.com) with a copy to rtty-questions@cqww.com. With that error message, the problem may have something to do with the robot and not with your log. 7; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-09/msg00235.html (8,216 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] IARU and 14100 Beacon QRM from Digital Signals (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 10:26:20 -0400; That operators are expected to recognize the potential for interference with a signal that is audible (or visible) is a reasonable assumption. For the not insignificant fraction of RTTY contesters us; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00004.html (8,187 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] IARU and 14100 Beacon QRM from Digital Signals (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:03:58 -0400; When it enters and leaves your antenna, RTTY is two radio frequencies. It's not necessary for anyone else to know what intermediate audio frequencies you're using to receive and/or generate these two; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00034.html (9,024 bytes)
14. Re: [RTTY] IARU and 14100 Beacon QRM from Digital Signals (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:08:08 -0400; The reason the dials would be reading differently is because the radios have not been calibrated to display the mark frequency, which is the convention for RTTY operation. On older radios we'd do tha; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00035.html (9,860 bytes)
15. Re: [RTTY] WF1B and "too many prefixes" (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:38:01 -0400; Jim, Look here for WF1B <http://www.sk3bg.se/Contest/download.htm#WF1B> Be aware this may not be strictly a country file issue. The COUNTRY conversion utility in WF1B v5 does have a complied-in limit; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00062.html (9,240 bytes)
16. Re: [RTTY] WF1B and "too many prefixes" (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 15:09:56 -0400; Not having gone through and examined the entire WF1B distribution in detail I can't comment globally, but from my cursory examination of the external declarations present in the source code for the W; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00067.html (8,831 bytes)
17. Re: [RTTY] Which Filter? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Fri, 06 Oct 2006 10:59:13 -0400; Ed, I think you'll be happier with the narrower filter. A 350 Hz filter is not too sharp for crowded conditions like a contest. A lot of RTTY contesters routinely use 250 Hz filters. 73, Mike K1MK Mi; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00073.html (7,600 bytes)
18. Re: [RTTY] RTTY Screwed by FCC? (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 09:19:02 -0400; It another typo. There's a typographical error on page 40 as well, so there's precedent for a degree of sloppiness in generating the R&O. Well, if it isn't a typo then it would have the effect of cre; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-10/msg00116.html (8,768 bytes)
19. Re: [RTTY] More on tthe "gripe" (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 15:10:59 -0500; Technically, the option in N1MM is to spot all S&P contacts with stations that are not already in the bandmap, i.e. stations who have not been spotted on the frequency within the last 15 or 30 minute; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-01/msg00313.html (8,010 bytes)
20. Re: [RTTY] More on tthe "gripe" (score: 1): Author: Michael Keane K1MK <k1mk@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:54:04 -0500; Frankly, that would seem an ideal situation for the assisted and multi-op stations who need the spots. After all, the whole point of having a spotting network is to have stations being spotted. Again; /archives//html/RTTY/2007-01/msg00324.html (9,363 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]