RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] Decoder performance on crowded bands

To: Jeff AC0C <keepwalking188@ac0c.com>
Subject: Re: [RTTY] Decoder performance on crowded bands
From: Rick Davenport <KI1G@Verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:24:27 -0400
List-post: <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Hi All,

I was using WinTelnetx as my Telnet interface, i had multiple skimmer windows 
as well as standard cluster windows funneling a ton of spots into Writelog. It 
didnt take long to notice the skimmer issue with non CQing stations being 
spotted. Definitely taking a drink from the firehose.

As the weekend progressed I would alternate turning off the skimmer inputs 
which would fill my bandmap with actual CQing stations that could be worked.

Later in the contest when I turned the skimmers inputs back on, the same 
problem existed but I noticed trends with needed multipliers being displayed. I 
could watch the skimmers track certain stations as they moved up or down the 
band, pay attention to the trend and call CQ about 5 khz from the last spot 
freq and bingo, they would call in like clockwork. This makes me think that the 
issue is related more to what the S&P station is doing in their macros than 
what the running station is doing.

There were others like CV4C that I spent alot of time chasing but could never 
find. This station was on the skimmers what seems like a couple dozen times but 
was never calling CQ. Once again I think the issue is with his/her macros and 
not the running stations.

Skimmers have definitely brought new meaning to the term " Single Op 
Distracted".

Thanks for all the Q's

73,
Rick KI1G

> On Sep 30, 2015, at 8:54 PM, Jeff AC0C <keepwalking188@ac0c.com> wrote:
> 
> A very very good thing indeed...
> 
> 73/jeff/ac0c
> www.ac0c.com
> alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
> 
> -----Original Message----- From: Bill Turner Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 
> 2015 7:17 PM To: RTTY Reflector Subject: Re: [RTTY] Decoder performance on 
> crowded bands 
> ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
> 
>> On Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:06:25 -0700, you wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Why do RTTY ops even put a "cq" at the end of their cq message?
>> 
>> CW ops never put a CQ at the end (except for a few newbie converts from 
>> RTTY).  45 Baud RTTY is 60 wpm, a lot faster than contest CW, so it's not 
>> like we had to wait so long for the call sign that we forgot that it was a 
>> CQ.
>> 
>> Since RTTY Skimmers are increasingly powerful and popular, and are getting 
>> confused by the cq at the end, maybe it's time to just drop that final cq.
>> 
>> Dave Hachadorian, K6LL
>> Yuma, AZ
> 
> REPLY:
> 
> It's not a case of "forgetting" that it was a CQ. It's a case of
> tuning across a station and getting only "...W6WRT W6WRT"
> The question is is W6WRT CQing or S&Ping? Can't tell, and so you have
> to wait for another transmission. 
> On the other hand, If you hear "...W6WRT W6WRT CQ" there is no doubt
> and you can answer immediately. 
> And of course, it's not just RTTY. CW contesters often add "TEST" at
> the end of their CQ's for the same reason. Likewise, SSB'ers add
> "CONTEST". 
> As Martha says "It's a good thing".  :-)
> 
> 73, Bill W6WRT
> _______________________________________________
> 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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>