> Serious about this reply? RTTY is "polluting" the band and
> somehow AM is acceptable?
Absolutely
1) RTTY is in traditionally CW portion of the band while AM
activity is generally in the relatively clear area close
to or above 1900 KHz.
2) RTTY with its continuous carrier is far more destructive
to CW activity than CW is to RTTY.
3) The presence of RTTY has forced W1AW's obnoxious bulletins
and code practice into relatively heavily used portions of
160 meters rather than down on 1807 or lower.
Like it or not, RTTY (170 Hz shift 45.45 baud FSK) is not
suited to the MF range - even in times of low sunspot numbers
which should represent the most benign conditions. In normal
conditions, FSK RTTY and other modes that are highly sensitive
to multi-path should not even be permitted at MF just like
wideband FM is not permitted below 29 MHz as it is simply
wasteful of the limited bandwidth.
160 meters is a limited resource that should be treated
with respect and not wasted on modes not suited to its
nature.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Blaine AC0C
> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 2:19 PM
> To: lists@subich.com; 'Jim W7RY'; rtty@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests
>
>
> Joe,
>
> Serious about this reply? RTTY is "polluting" the band and
> somehow AM is
> acceptable?
>
> How many RTTY sigs can you get into the bandwidth of a single AM
> transmission. In fact, how many RTTY sigs could you get in
> the bandwidth of
> a single SSB transmission?
>
> It's funny that somehow RTTY is considered disrespectful
> pollution, and
> AM/SSB and CW are considered acceptable if the argument is
> from a bandwidth
> viewpoint.
>
> Being a gentlemen, in my humble opinion, is not only tending
> to your own
> behavior, but respecting the rights of others who may not hold your
> viewpoint. Unless, that is, "gentlemen" in this context
> actually is code
> for "if you think like I do, then you are in, if not, then
> you are out."
>
> Hard to find a young ham these days... Inclusion and
> experimentation should
> be priorities in our hobby so we can attract more guys into
> the joy of ham
> radio. And what band offers more opportunity for challenge and
> experimentation than 160m?
>
> Confused in Kansas / 73/jeff/ac0c
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>
> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 11:04 AM
> To: "'Jim W7RY'" <w7ry@arrl.net>; <rtty@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests
>
> >
> >
> >> I would not call this a poll from the RTTY community. There were
> >> quite a few responses on this reflector from the top band
> reflector
> >> too.
> >
> > However, the poll was announced only on RTTY and not
> TopBand. Unless
> > one was both a 160 meter regular and subscribed to RTTY, they would
> > not have seen the poll announcement. It is interesting that the
> > results are 36:36 as of the current moment ... and I know several
> > opposed to RTTY contests on 160 who have not voted because the poll
> > requires a persistent, third party cookie.
> >
> >> And "they" call it the gentleman's band ?
> >
> > Absolutely. Being "gentleman" includes NOT polluting the
> band with an
> > inefficient, multi-path sensitive, constant carrier mode that takes
> > more bandwidth than necessary (approximately 300 Hz for 60 WPM RTTY
> > vs. about 70 Hz for 60 WPM CW) for the communications rate.
> Even the
> > AM phone operators are generally gentlemen and stay high in
> the band.
> > Being a "gentleman" does not mean accepting a mud pie in the punch
> > bowl.
> >
> > TF4M has it right, 160 meters is a serious band and should
> be treated
> > with respect.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > ... Joe, W4TV
> >
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: rtty-bounces@contesting.com
> >> [mailto:rtty-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Jim W7RY
> >> Sent: Saturday, October 31, 2009 10:54 AM
> >> To: Dallmeier, Walter; rtty@contesting.com; drcg@drcg.de
> >> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Topband: 160m in RTTY Contests
> >>
> >>
> >> I would not call this a poll from the RTTY community. There were
> >> quite a few responses on this reflector from the top band
> reflector
> >> too.
> >>
> >> Most top band hard core folks don't want RTTY on "their" band. And
> >> "they" call it the gentleman's band ?
> >>
> >> 73
> >>
> >> Jim W7RY
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|