To: | rtty@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots |
From: | "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com> |
Date: | Thu, 15 Oct 2015 14:04:51 -0400 |
List-post: | <rtty@contesting.com">mailto:rtty@contesting.com> |
Do you abhor AFC in all of the multiple decoders that you using? John KK9A -----Original Message----- From: Ed Muns Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2015 4:08 PM To: 'Jeff AC0C' ; 'Pete Smith N4ZR' Cc: 'RTTY Contesting' Subject: Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots Good point about AFC. I abhor that feature and never use it, so don't consider it much. To the extent spots are accurate to 2 decimal points relative to the radio, then AFC would benefit S&P by reducing manual tuning. I still shutter at the thought of this. ;>) Ed W0YK _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots, Jeff Stai |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots, Ed Muns |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots, iw1ayd - Salvatore Irato |
Next by Thread: | Re: [RTTY] Contester preference - 1- versus 2-decimal-place spots, Ed Muns |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |