Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+AFSK\s+Mark\s+Tone\s+2000\s+Hz\s+vs\.\s+2125\s+Hz\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] AFSK Mark Tone 2000 Hz vs. 2125 Hz (score: 1)
Author: Dick Kriss <aa5vu@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2009 15:21:16 -0500
I was calling CQ Sunday AM and a KD6 responded but he was not on my receive frequency. I tuned to him then he retuned to me. He was using MMTTY and I was using cocoaModem and we were both using AFSK
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-03/msg00180.html (7,887 bytes)

2. Re: [RTTY] AFSK Mark Tone 2000 Hz vs. 2125 Hz (score: 1)
Author: Dick Kriss <aa5vu@arrl.net>
Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2009 15:52:17 -0500
Disregard my posting. Cockpit issue on my end. Dick AA5VU _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-03/msg00181.html (6,700 bytes)

3. Re: [RTTY] AFSK Mark Tone 2000 Hz vs. 2125 Hz (score: 1)
Author: Gedking@aol.com
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 21:06:42 EDT
2125Kc is the standard to try anything else is foolish I do not and will not answer anybody using 2000Kc. Oh I can see them on the waterfall trying to call me off my frequency but I refuse to move of
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-03/msg00183.html (7,265 bytes)

4. Re: [RTTY] AFSK Mark Tone 2000 Hz vs. 2125 Hz (score: 1)
Author: curt nixon <cptcurt@flash.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Using a different mark frequency with AFSK has no relationship to being off ffrequency!  Plain and simple fact. . I run 1445 mark and  170 and I challenge you to tell the difference. This sort of non
/archives//html/RTTY/2009-03/msg00185.html (8,612 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu