RTTY

Popular Threads From RTTY:

@ W6WRT.. Cheatings and Disturbing observations

BARTG 75 Sprint

Cheating

Motherboard Recommendation

Your complaints

List Statistics

Total Threads: 1017
Total Posts: 1043

Phrases Used to Find This Thread

Page 1 of 1

13-06-2010 10:19 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 12:02 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 12:18 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 02:52 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 02:55 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 06:00 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 07:04 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 09:27 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

13-06-2010 09:28 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#10

13-06-2010 11:44 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#11

14-06-2010 04:23 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#12

14-06-2010 05:52 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#13

14-06-2010 06:10 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#14

14-06-2010 07:26 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

Hi.

Excuses first!

Despite a stuck beam, broken rhombic, no linear and poor propagation, I
think this
could be called a great success, plus a lot of fun.

I managed 58 Qs, some on 15 but the majority on 20 metres. 10 was dead
for me.

BARTGRTTYS Score Summary Sheet

CallSign Used : G3LDI

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP

Power : LOW
Mode : RTTY
Default Exchange : 001
Gridsquare : JO02ON

Software : N1MM Logger V10.6.0

Band QSOs Pts Cty Sec Cnt
14 50 50 21 8 4
21 8 8 3 0 0
Total 58 58 24 8 4

Score : 7,424

Great fun, difficult to keep up sometimes, but I think 75 Bauds has
certainly proved
more than capable of being the standard speed. Perhaps a few purists
will think otherwise,
the normal jingle-bell rhythm has been altered! However, after using it
for a while, I became
accustomed to it. Macros will have to be tweaked to cater for the higher
speed with a few
more repeats of essential exchanges being needed. I found a few stations
trying to be too
slick, and their exchange was merely "17" or similar. Obviously this is
too short with the
****aries of HF and I feel we should have a bit more in the exchange than
that! There is even
time for a GE or 73 or HI Fred! Why not, I like to be sociable......

Some nice DX worked, FM5, JA, ZP9, couple from SA, even Ian, GM3KLN,
GB50ATG
and Arf, G1XKZ. I was very pleased to work G3WW, who at 93, is still
contesting!!

I hope John now includes this in the RTTY calendar, and keeps it
short too. We have
enough marathons! Thanks to him for arranging it, and thanks to all who
took part.

73 de Roger, G3LDI, BARTG Chairman

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
Hello,

Nice to see everyone on the screen. I also worked G3WW and wondered about his age!

Comments seen so far have all been praising the contest, even seen 'all contests should be run on 75' from one W regular. I thought it was brilliant. Much slicker (working 4 a minute at the start) and also very much quicker when searching through for new ones. Going back to the other contest on 45 seemed a complete pain ... so slow! My usual 250Hz filter was OK most of the time but it is a bit tight on 75, so had to switch to 500Hz for a few contacts.

GB50ATG made 108 contacts in about 2 hrs 30. I had to see the end of the football so missed the best bit, then took another break later for food.

I will have a rethink about time and bands after the logs are in but definitely support of another similar venture. It needs more activity to get the best of the high rates and maybe running slightly earlier and all band will help. I agree with Roger that it should stay short at 4 hours.

About 30 logs in so far and a lot will come after the German test finishes.

Cheers,

John GW4SKA
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Cooke
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:19 AM
Subject: BARTG 75 Sprint

Hi.

Excuses first!

Despite a stuck beam, broken rhombic, no linear and poor propagation, I think this
could be called a great success, plus a lot of fun.

I managed 58 Qs, some on 15 but the majority on 20 metres. 10 was dead for me.

BARTGRTTYS Score Summary Sheet

CallSign Used : G3LDI

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP

Power : LOW
Mode : RTTY
Default Exchange : 001
Gridsquare : JO02ON

Software : N1MM Logger V10.6.0

Band QSOs Pts Cty Sec Cnt
14 50 50 21 8 4
21 8 8 3 0 0
Total 58 58 24 8 4

Score : 7,424

Great fun, difficult to keep up sometimes, but I think 75 Bauds has certainly proved
more than capable of being the standard speed. Perhaps a few purists will think otherwise,
the normal jingle-bell rhythm has been altered! However, after using it for a while, I became
accustomed to it. Macros will have to be tweaked to cater for the higher speed with a few
more repeats of essential exchanges being needed. I found a few stations trying to be too
slick, and their exchange was merely "17" or similar. Obviously this is too short with the
****aries of HF and I feel we should have a bit more in the exchange than that! There is even
time for a GE or 73 or HI Fred! Why not, I like to be sociable......

Some nice DX worked, FM5, JA, ZP9, couple from SA, even Ian, GM3KLN, GB50ATG
and Arf, G1XKZ. I was very pleased to work G3WW, who at 93, is still contesting!!

I hope John now includes this in the RTTY calendar, and keeps it short too. We have
enough marathons! Thanks to him for arranging it, and thanks to all who took part.

73 de Roger, G3LDI, BARTG Chairman

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
BARTG sprint 75

a little score compilation is here

http://www.f6aoj.ao-journal.com/crbst_325.html

73 Jeff F6AOJ

http://www.f6aoj.ao-journal.com/

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. That was a blast! I really enjoyed the 75 baud RTTY Sprint. I agree with Roger in that it proved 75 baud can be used in RTTY
contests with good success. I thought it would be more difficult but it wasn't. Working SO2R was a challenge, but I quickly found
the key is to concentrate mostly on making sure the signal tuned in quickly.

And I agree with John that after using 75 baud, then going back to 45 baud in DLDC felt very slow. The biggest problems I saw were
with weak signals. They just didn't seem to print well at all. I had summer time noise on 20 meters which made it difficult at
times. So I can imagine that 40 and 80 could be a waste of time at this time of year.

I disagree in that I feel the contest should be longer than four hours - maybe 8 hours. And I'm not sure working 75 baud would be
much fun on the low bands. I really like the high band format. It would be better not to have it in the summer, at least down
here! We were lucky in that 15 and 20 meters were in fairly good shape. I was surprised to work FG5LA, GW5NF, HC1JQ, G3WW, YT5W,
EA7CIX, and GB50ATG along with a host of NA stations on 15 meters. I was disappointed in missing AF and OC. I also could not put
in a full effort, but really had a great time. It was more fun than expected.

Results:

Band QSO DX CA Cont
20 84 19 12 4
15 43 3 2 0
---------------------
Total 127 22 14 4

Score: 18,288

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:02 AM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint

Hello,

Nice to see everyone on the screen. I also worked G3WW and wondered about his age!

Comments seen so far have all been praising the contest, even seen 'all contests should be run on 75' from one W regular. I thought
it was brilliant. Much slicker (working 4 a minute at the start) and also very much quicker when searching through for new ones.
Going back to the other contest on 45 seemed a complete pain ... so slow! My usual 250Hz filter was OK most of the time but it is a
bit tight on 75, so had to switch to 500Hz for a few contacts.

GB50ATG made 108 contacts in about 2 hrs 30. I had to see the end of the football so missed the best bit, then took another break
later for food.

I will have a rethink about time and bands after the logs are in but definitely support of another similar venture. It needs more
activity to get the best of the high rates and maybe running slightly earlier and all band will help. I agree with Roger that it
should stay short at 4 hours.

About 30 logs in so far and a lot will come after the German test finishes.

Cheers,

John GW4SKA
----- Original Message -----
From: Roger Cooke
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:19 AM
Subject: BARTG 75 Sprint

Hi.

Excuses first!

Despite a stuck beam, broken rhombic, no linear and poor propagation, I think this
could be called a great success, plus a lot of fun.

I managed 58 Qs, some on 15 but the majority on 20 metres. 10 was dead for me.

BARTGRTTYS Score Summary Sheet

CallSign Used : G3LDI

Operator Category : SINGLE-OP

Power : LOW
Mode : RTTY
Default Exchange : 001
Gridsquare : JO02ON

Software : N1MM Logger V10.6.0

Band QSOs Pts Cty Sec Cnt
14 50 50 21 8 4
21 8 8 3 0 0
Total 58 58 24 8 4

Score : 7,424

Great fun, difficult to keep up sometimes, but I think 75 Bauds has certainly proved
more than capable of being the standard speed. Perhaps a few purists will think otherwise,
the normal jingle-bell rhythm has been altered! However, after using it for a while, I became
accustomed to it. Macros will have to be tweaked to cater for the higher speed with a few
more repeats of essential exchanges being needed. I found a few stations trying to be too
slick, and their exchange was merely "17" or similar. Obviously this is too short with the
****aries of HF and I feel we should have a bit more in the exchange than that! There is even
time for a GE or 73 or HI Fred! Why not, I like to be sociable......

Some nice DX worked, FM5, JA, ZP9, couple from SA, even Ian, GM3KLN, GB50ATG
and Arf, G1XKZ. I was very pleased to work G3WW, who at 93, is still contesting!!

I hope John now includes this in the RTTY calendar, and keeps it short too. We have
enough marathons! Thanks to him for arranging it, and thanks to all who took part.

73 de Roger, G3LDI, BARTG Chairman

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> � �Some nice DX worked, FM5, JA, ZP9, couple from SA, even Ian, GM3KLN,
> GB50ATG
> and Arf, G1XKZ. �I was very pleased to work G3WW, who at 93, is still
> contesting!!

G3WW is 93?

Let this be a lesson to all those who claim that Logbook of the World
is "too hard": I uploaded my log 17 minutes after the contest ended
and immediately got a QSL from G3WW.

93? You'd never know!

--
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 13, 2010, at 6/13 6:52 AM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote:

> That was a blast! I really enjoyed the 75 baud RTTY Sprint.

Has everybody forgotten the High Speed Sprint (HSS) contest already?

The same 75 baud, and similarly short contest. I have logs from 1997
through 2000. And then the contest appeared to have fizzled out.

My first contact in 2000 was with an AA5AU :-). Followed in the log
by the usual suspects: WS7I, N8YYS, VE3WQ, W4JLS, W0ETC, and ta da...
W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.

KK5OQ, K0RC, K3MM, K5DJ, W7TI (remember him?) and ta da... VE6RAJ were
among calls my 1998 log.

As I said, the usual suspects :-) :-).

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

>W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.

REPLY:

Whatever happened to Eddie? Anyone know?

73, Bill W6WRT
_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. >>W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Whatever happened to Eddie? Anyone know?
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT

Hi Bill

I see according to QRZ.com, that he still has that callsign. 73
Tom W7WHY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Oops, in looking again, I see he's in California, England, what ever that
means. 73
Tom W7WHY
>
>>W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>
> REPLY:
>
> Whatever happened to Eddie? Anyone know?
>
> 73, Bill W6WRT

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. I asked the same question a few years ago.

Seem to remember being told he had totally lost interest in radio.

73,
John GW4SKA

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 9:28 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint

>
> Oops, in looking again, I see he's in California, England, what ever that
> means. 73
> Tom W7WHY
>>
>>>W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>>
>> REPLY:
>>
>> Whatever happened to Eddie? Anyone know?
>>
>> 73, Bill W6WRT
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Sure, I remember that contest! :-) It pretty much fizzled because I had
looked for a "commercial sponsor" but was not having much success. Then
family "issues" reared their ugly head and I was off the air for several
years so the HSS fell into oblivion. I had talked to Ron K5DJ about it. He
took over the contest weekend but decided upon a different contest format.

Yesterday I decoded someone sending CQ HSS... and that put a smile on my
face... apparently someone else remembered it too!

This was the first time I have used two different decoders in a contest, the
normal MMTTY soundcard software and my old Kantronics KAM Plus TNC. It was
quite the circus act trying to get that KAM going on a laptop with only USB
ports available, but I finally won that battle.

I thought the KAM was a decent decoder "in its day", but having the two RX
windows open side by side, the MMTTY engine was clearly the winner when
signals would dive into the noise. My Icom Pro 3 also has the advantage of
the Twin Passband Filters and this helped both decoders when a signal was
too weak to copy normally. Turning on this filter creates a serious "noise"
issue which is irritating to listen to for an extended period of time, so I
only turn it on when necessary.

There were stations I called who could not copy me. I was running 300 Watts
which helped somewhat, but I think having the Twin Passband Filters in my
receiver might have been another part of the problem of a one-way
"connection". Other variables are the other station may have been running
1500 Watts and/or he did not have Twin Passband Filters in his rig. So it's
really difficult to draw a conclusion without more information.

I did not experience abnormal requests for repeats. But this is really
subjective as well. It's tough to quantify with only one "Test" and the less
than ideal propagation during the contest. I was keeping track... I asked
for 3 repeats, and I was asked for 4 repeats. My repeats were to verify I
got the serial number more than one time on my screen. These were mostly
European stations and they were during QSB conditions. I was impressed how
quickly the exchanges came across the screen when decoding normally.

My opinion is the RTTY contesting community should look toward moving to
this higher speed. As a SO1R operator, the first hour tested my skill to
punch the right keys, log the contact, and settle into the faster routine. I
can imagine the higher rates would even challenge the SO2R operators in the
beginning. Maybe some SO2R operators can comment on this?

73 de Bob - K�RC in MN

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint

> On Jun 13, 2010, at 6/13 6:52 AM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
>
>> That was a blast! I really enjoyed the 75 baud RTTY Sprint.
>
> Has everybody forgotten the High Speed Sprint (HSS) contest already?
>
> The same 75 baud, and similarly short contest. I have logs from 1997
> through 2000. And then the contest appeared to have fizzled out.
>
> My first contact in 2000 was with an AA5AU :-). Followed in the log
> by the usual suspects: WS7I, N8YYS, VE3WQ, W4JLS, W0ETC, and ta da...
> W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>
> KK5OQ, K0RC, K3MM, K5DJ, W7TI (remember him?) and ta da... VE6RAJ were
> among calls my 1998 log.
>
> As I said, the usual suspects :-) :-).
>
> 73
> Chen, W7AY
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. Bob K0RC wrote: "I can imagine the higher rates would even challenge the SO2R operators in the beginning. Maybe some SO2R operators
can comment on this?"

I don't remember much about the High Speed Sprint other than I took part in them! It may have been harder back then since we didn't
have MMTTY and perhaps the decoders weren't up to the challenge. I just don't remember how it was.

Running SO2R at 75 baud caused a rush of adrenalin and it was a challenge, but didn't take long to figure out. I'm glad I wasn't
drinking alcohol! (I'm on call at work so had to stay sober) As I stated earlier, the biggest concern was getting the signal tuned
in fast when S&P. Since I practice this all the time at 45 baud, it wasn't difficult for me to do, but there was more of a sense of
urgency at this high of speed. I tried running both radios as much as I could but activity was not high enough to sustain any rate
so S&P was needed. The trick is to stay calm. I got into a flow rather quickly and really got a kick out of the text screaming
across the screen.

I was constantly adjusting my messages on the fly for the first hour. Before the contest, I took a conservative approach and
created longer messages than what I normally use at 45 baud. In many cases, I found the messages didn't need to be much longer, if
any. One time when running, a station I was working came back with something like "7-7" and that was it. They just sent the number
twice and it printed perfectly. I had a buffer created already in case someone needed a repeat of my number. It was just the
number sent 5 times. So I started using that as my S&P report - just the number sent five times. It worked great. No need to send
my call if the run station got it right. No need to send the callsign of the run station, because he/she already knows their call.
I noticed most everyone was sending three digit numbers even at the start. I decided on using single digit numbers, then double,
etc 1, 2, 10 instead of 001, 002, 010, to make things even faster and it worked well.

I'm not sure about pressing 100 baud onto other RTTY contests. I still prefer 45 baud and it's robustness through band noise, QRM
and weak signals. I seriously doubt 100 baud is going to work in a lot of situations where 45 baud can - like the low bands in the
summer time or when there are two or more stations calling at the same time.

73, Don AA5AU
http://www.aa5au.com
http://www.rttycontesting.com

-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:23 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint

Sure, I remember that contest! :-) It pretty much fizzled because I had looked for a "commercial sponsor" but was not having much
success. Then family "issues" reared their ugly head and I was off the air for several years so the HSS fell into oblivion. I had
talked to Ron K5DJ about it. He took over the contest weekend but decided upon a different contest format.

Yesterday I decoded someone sending CQ HSS... and that put a smile on my face... apparently someone else remembered it too!

This was the first time I have used two different decoders in a contest, the normal MMTTY soundcard software and my old Kantronics
KAM Plus TNC. It was quite the circus act trying to get that KAM going on a laptop with only USB ports available, but I finally won
that battle.

I thought the KAM was a decent decoder "in its day", but having the two RX windows open side by side, the MMTTY engine was clearly
the winner when signals would dive into the noise. My Icom Pro 3 also has the advantage of the Twin Passband Filters and this helped
both decoders when a signal was too weak to copy normally. Turning on this filter creates a serious "noise"
issue which is irritating to listen to for an extended period of time, so I only turn it on when necessary.

There were stations I called who could not copy me. I was running 300 Watts which helped somewhat, but I think having the Twin
Passband Filters in my receiver might have been another part of the problem of a one-way "connection". Other variables are the other
station may have been running 1500 Watts and/or he did not have Twin Passband Filters in his rig. So it's really difficult to draw a
conclusion without more information.

I did not experience abnormal requests for repeats. But this is really subjective as well. It's tough to quantify with only one
"Test" and the less than ideal propagation during the contest. I was keeping track... I asked for 3 repeats, and I was asked for 4
repeats. My repeats were to verify I got the serial number more than one time on my screen. These were mostly European stations and
they were during QSB conditions. I was impressed how quickly the exchanges came across the screen when decoding normally.

My opinion is the RTTY contesting community should look toward moving to this higher speed. As a SO1R operator, the first hour
tested my skill to punch the right keys, log the contact, and settle into the faster routine. I can imagine the higher rates would
even challenge the SO2R operators in the beginning. Maybe some SO2R operators can comment on this?

73 de Bob - K�RC in MN

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint

> On Jun 13, 2010, at 6/13 6:52 AM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
>
>> That was a blast! I really enjoyed the 75 baud RTTY Sprint.
>
> Has everybody forgotten the High Speed Sprint (HSS) contest already?
>
> The same 75 baud, and similarly short contest. I have logs from 1997
> through 2000. And then the contest appeared to have fizzled out.
>
> My first contact in 2000 was with an AA5AU :-). Followed in the log
> by the usual suspects: WS7I, N8YYS, VE3WQ, W4JLS, W0ETC, and ta da...
> W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>
> KK5OQ, K0RC, K3MM, K5DJ, W7TI (remember him?) and ta da... VE6RAJ were
> among calls my 1998 log.
>
> As I said, the usual suspects :-) :-).
>
> 73
> Chen, W7AY
>
> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.
> My opinion is the RTTY contesting community should look toward moving
> to this higher speed.

Maybe the broader question should be whether 75 baud ASCII (75 8N2)
should replace 45.45 baud 5 bit codes (45.45 5N1.5) in general?

The bandwidth requirements are very similar: CCIR 328-5 puts 45.45
baud/170 Hz shift at 246 Hz vs. 262 Hz for 75 baud/170 Hz shift.
The NTIA (Annex J) puts 45.45 baud.170 Hz shift at 279 Hz vs. 350
Hz for 75 baud. Even with the added bits the 8 bit code is slightly
faster overall (146 ms/character vs, 165 ms) than 5 bit/45.45 baud.

For amateur use the 8 bit code has two other advantages - elimination
of the Figs/Letters shift and the ability to support non-English
alphabets. Amateur radio also seems to be the last user of five
bit codes - their long term support is far from certain (and more
of a problem than the lack of sub-300 baud support in newer hardware).

I'm sure Chen can provide the math for theoretical s/n differences
but since amateur detection methods are far from optimal in a lot
of cases, I doubt that there would be much practical difference
in that regard.

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 6/13/2010 11:23 PM, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
> Sure, I remember that contest! :-) It pretty much fizzled because I had
> looked for a "commercial sponsor" but was not having much success. Then
> family "issues" reared their ugly head and I was off the air for several
> years so the HSS fell into oblivion. I had talked to Ron K5DJ about it. He
> took over the contest weekend but decided upon a different contest format.
>
> Yesterday I decoded someone sending CQ HSS... and that put a smile on my
> face... apparently someone else remembered it too!
>
> This was the first time I have used two different decoders in a contest, the
> normal MMTTY soundcard software and my old Kantronics KAM Plus TNC. It was
> quite the circus act trying to get that KAM going on a laptop with only USB
> ports available, but I finally won that battle.
>
> I thought the KAM was a decent decoder "in its day", but having the two RX
> windows open side by side, the MMTTY engine was clearly the winner when
> signals would dive into the noise. My Icom Pro 3 also has the advantage of
> the Twin Passband Filters and this helped both decoders when a signal was
> too weak to copy normally. Turning on this filter creates a serious "noise"
> issue which is irritating to listen to for an extended period of time, so I
> only turn it on when necessary.
>
> There were stations I called who could not copy me. I was running 300 Watts
> which helped somewhat, but I think having the Twin Passband Filters in my
> receiver might have been another part of the problem of a one-way
> "connection". Other variables are the other station may have been running
> 1500 Watts and/or he did not have Twin Passband Filters in his rig. So it's
> really difficult to draw a conclusion without more information.
>
> I did not experience abnormal requests for repeats. But this is really
> subjective as well. It's tough to quantify with only one "Test" and the less
> than ideal propagation during the contest. I was keeping track... I asked
> for 3 repeats, and I was asked for 4 repeats. My repeats were to verify I
> got the serial number more than one time on my screen. These were mostly
> European stations and they were during QSB conditions. I was impressed how
> quickly the exchanges came across the screen when decoding normally.
>
> My opinion is the RTTY contesting community should look toward moving to
> this higher speed. As a SO1R operator, the first hour tested my skill to
> punch the right keys, log the contact, and settle into the faster routine. I
> can imagine the higher rates would even challenge the SO2R operators in the
> beginning. Maybe some SO2R operators can comment on this?
>
> 73 de Bob - K�RC in MN
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:00 PM
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] BARTG 75 Sprint
>
>
>> On Jun 13, 2010, at 6/13 6:52 AM, Don Hill AA5AU wrote:
>>
>>> That was a blast! I really enjoyed the 75 baud RTTY Sprint.
>>
>> Has everybody forgotten the High Speed Sprint (HSS) contest already?
>>
>> The same 75 baud, and similarly short contest. I have logs from 1997
>> through 2000. And then the contest appeared to have fizzled out.
>>
>> My first contact in 2000 was with an AA5AU :-). Followed in the log
>> by the usual suspects: WS7I, N8YYS, VE3WQ, W4JLS, W0ETC, and ta da...
>> W6/G0AZT, and more familiar call signs.
>>
>> KK5OQ, K0RC, K3MM, K5DJ, W7TI (remember him?) and ta da... VE6RAJ were
>> among calls my 1998 log.
>>
>> As I said, the usual suspects :-) :-).
>>
>> 73
>> Chen, W7AY
>>
>> _______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe. On Jun 13, 2010, at 10:10 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Even with the added bits the 8 bit code is slightly
> faster overall (146 ms/character vs, 165 ms) than 5 bit/45.45 baud.

I think I have mentioned earlier that 7-bit ASCII and 5-bit Baudot takes about equal duration to transmit a typical contest exchanges even when both of them use the *same* baud rate.

Counterintuitive? Perhaps.

The reason is the ASCII exchange won't have to transmit the numerous FIGS and LTRS characters that you find in a Baudot exchange. The Baudot exchange transmits shorter characters, but sends more of them. The ASCII exchange contains longer characters, but fewer of them since there are no LTRS or FIGS shift to send.

With exchanges that contain numbers between spaces (or even a number in between alphabets of a callsign), the ASCII op actually spends less time sending a typical contest exchange. With some other exchanges (e.g., if your callsign is RAEM and you use dashes between exchange numbers, such as 599-123-123) the Baudot op wins by a little. Overall, I think it is a wash in terms of printed characters per second.

Remember too that you are not comparing 7 to 5, you are comparing 7+start+stop to 5+start+stop.

ASCII used to be transmitted at 110 baud, 7 bit + 2 stop, no parity and 170 Hz shift. But you do not *need* to switch to 110 baud when using ASCII.

The 110 baud number was probably determined by the then popular Model 33 Teletype. (Just as the Model 19 drove the 45.45 baud number.) You certainly could keep using 45.45 baud or 75 baud as we do today with Baudot. I personally think that 110 baud is needlessly fast for keyboard-to-keyboard QSO and rather wasteful of bandwidth and comes with an increase in error rate.

The biggest impediment though, as Bob K0RC pointed out is that MMTTY lacks ASCII capability.

73
Chen, W7AY

_______________________________________________
___________________________________________________

Posted on the RTTY mailing list. Go to http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/RTTY to subscribe.

#15

14-06-2010 07:59 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#16

14-06-2010 10:33 AM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#17

14-06-2010 12:39 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#18

14-06-2010 02:36 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#19

14-06-2010 02:41 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

#20

14-06-2010 04:12 PM

RTTY member admin is online now

User

Page 1 of 1

NewsArc Lists | Culture Pages | Computing Archive | Media-Pages

Link to this page on your blog or website by copying the HTML code below and pasting it into your site:

Next Thread »