> On Oct 31, 2009, at 6:29 PM, Bill, W6WRT wrote:
>
> > REPLY:
> >
> > Absolute nonsense. Anyone who has spent much time actually
> > operating 160 meter RTTY knows it works just fine. This is
> > one canard that should die a quick and merciful death.
There goes Bill again ... writing what he "wishes" were true
without any understanding of the physics behind the subject
and ignoring the experts in the field. 45 baud, 170 Hz FSK
has a well established minimum SNR that is not often met on
long haul (more than groundwave or NVIS) medium wave paths.
In addition, "RTTY" is very sensitive to the very kind of
multipath distortion common on medium waves. Simply put.
RTTY as amateurs know it is not useful for much more than
local or limited regional QSOs on 160 meters and is certainly
not suited to international contesting.
If there was a real interest in digital mode communication
at medium waves, the push would be for system using low baud
rates, multiple closely spaced tones and a robust coding that
would work with signal to noise ratios approaching 0 dB with
multipath delays in excess of 10 to 15 msec.
Absent interest in an MW optimized protocol, calls for
increased RTTY activity, particularly contesting on 160
meters are nothing more than intentional and destructive
interference to other users of the band.
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|