Sure wish I could put up such a "no antenna" antenna from my apartment
where the noise level is often 20 or more dB over S9. Working any DX on
even FT8 is a real rare occurence from here where I have a mobile antenna
working against an iron railing on my second floor balcony.
On Thu, Jul 16,
>"And I have one that says "RTTY" but it's now a Digital DXCC. I had to
resort to FT8 to work Monaco to get on the Digital Honor Roll, with the
other 330 having been on RTTY."
Just to quickly add my input before the topic is canned.
I'm not enamored with FT8 but just for grins, I conducted an
I still say, “appliance operator “
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jul 13, 2020, at 3:36 PM, Victor Rosenthal 4X6GP
> wrote:
>
> I didn't notice myself "denigrating" anything or "talking down" to anyone. I
> explained why I like CW, even though other modes have their own advantages.
>
> Regarding
I didn't notice myself "denigrating" anything or "talking down" to
anyone. I explained why I like CW, even though other modes have their
own advantages.
Regarding "increasing knowledge" and "innovating," I suspect that 90% of
the guys pointing and clicking their way to DXCC with K1JT's code
Connecting to history and making history are not the same thing. Doing
things the same way they were done a hundred years ago may make a
"connection" for you. But hams are supposed to innovate, invent and
increase the knowledge. So you buy or build equipment with way more ability
than to send
Oh give me a break. On any given day or night the CW frequencies are
dead as a wombat except for FT8.
And I never proposed "saving" CW anyway. Just the opposite ... I
proposed modifying FT8 so that it had the flexibility of CW.
Dave AB7E
On 7/13/2020 7:57 AM, Drew AF2Z wrote:
Just as one can go from an electric or petroleum powered vehicle back to
cart and horse (the common factor being wheels), doesn't mean that the
history to get from there to here must be ignored (or honored).
It doesn't matter the mode, ties into history will still exist and can
be honored (or
That’s definitely true. Although I do have a gripe (is it FT4?) with the
software that has arbitrarily plopped its users down in what was just a few
months ago the home of mostly CW QRP activity on some bands. There does seem
to be a need for coordination.
Of course, I’m also old enough to
@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
Please- *nobody* is asking JT to save CW by giving us an extra 6-8 dB
SNR. I hope that is not the next Goldilocks mode in the pipeline. I
assume proponents of such a cobbled up "user interf
FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
time frames are simply
e normally at
very low power levels.
73
Lyn, W0LEN
-Original Message-
From: David Gilbert [mailto:ab7e...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 8:57 PM
To: l...@lnainc.com; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
* On 2020 13 Jul 02:47 -0500, David Gilbert wrote:
>
> No, those other posts didn't say that.
Perhaps not directly. Preferences can always be strongly implied.
I think it is inarguable that years back ARRL publications had a bias
toward antennas that favored DX. DX is fine and perhaps that
Two great posts, Dave. Thanks!
73 Jim K9YC
On 7/13/2020 12:59 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
Fine, but that demarcation is pretty arbitrary. You could just as
easily go back to tube gear with crystal controlled transmitters and
regenerative receivers., but I'd be a lot of money you don't. The
Actually, I'm building a regenerative receiver now. I have to use JFETs
because I got rid of all my tube stuff due to lack of room. But of
course I will continue to benefit from the DSP in my K3, and its keyer
(although I have a bug that I use once in a while).
But those things don't take
I believe that half of US hams are Technician Class, so mostly VHF/UHF FM
operators. Not a lot of DX or contesting there.
Sent from my iPhone
...nr4c. bill
> On Jul 13, 2020, at 4:03 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
>
>
> Fine, but that demarcation is pretty arbitrary. You could just as easily
Fine, but that demarcation is pretty arbitrary. You could just as
easily go back to tube gear with crystal controlled transmitters and
regenerative receivers., but I'd be a lot of money you don't. The gear
you operate compares little in form, fit or function to anything those
folks used
No, those other posts didn't say that.
I don't know why some hams insist on fabricating controversy where there
is none. It seems like the bulk of our American society is determined
to be as tribal as possible. Sorry times we live in.
Dave AB7E
On 7/12/2020 9:09 PM, Lynn W. Taylor,
For me, it's simple.
When I make a CW contact, even if its total content is "ENN TU", I am
connected to history, to Jack Phillips on the Titanic, to all of the
military traffic men and airborne radio operators of WWII, to the
operators on the merchant ships on the high seas and the Great
: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
Well, the fact is that the coding and processing be
First of all, there is no comparison between the cost of what you just
described and the cost of the software required to provide what I
hypothesized. Secondly, what I hypothesized would stack on top of what
you described without conflict.
So I'm afraid I really don't understand the point
There is a way to improve the signal to noise of the CW signal. It is called
the yagi or beam antenna.
The tower, guy system, beam, feedline, connectors, and switching, all have
considerable appeal for some of us, the same as a good paddle, or a K3 radio.
My four towers and yagis were built by
> On Jul 12, 2020, at 6:57 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>
> Think of it this way ... CW works fine as both a contest mode, DXing mode,
> and conversational mode. Underlaying CW with a well configured digital
> signal processing scheme like that which is under FT8, except with a
> different
, W0LEN
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
Well
.
http://js8call.com/
73
Lyn, W0LEN
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll
since day one.
http://js8call.com/
73
Lyn, W0LEN
-Original Message-
From: elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:elecraft-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Th
Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X. It only
requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
rate, and
26 matches
Mail list logo
