| |
VK6BE > MORSE 18.06.06 18:14l 24 Lines 1150 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1E0078VK6BE
Read: GUEST DF1GG
Subj: Re: VK3XX > small survey
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0MRW<DK0WUE<DB0RES<ON0AR<IW8PGT<SP7MGD<CE8FGC<VK6HGR<
VK6BBR<VK6ZRT<VK6JY
Sent: 060618/0109Z @:VK6JY.#ALY.#WA.AUS.OC #:17357 [Albany] wFBB7 $:1E0078VK6B
From: VK6BE@VK6JY.#ALY.#WA.AUS.OC
To : MORSE@WW
I think Warren has missed the point. Noone will argue with the claim that
sophisticated digital systems can do marvellous things and possibly outdo
CW. However the point I made in my bulletin was that all you need to be
able to operate CW is a pair of human ears and some sort of radio
receiver. You can take these anywhere. Who wants to carry about modems and
computers and use sophisticated software?
No comparison, Warren, CW is simple and needs only simple gear, PSK and
other modes need computers and other gear and software.
My bulletin made this point but maybe you did not see it.
Bob VK6BE.
>
> If you think that CW is a better weak signal mode than PSK then you need
> to learn the tweaks. If noise masks PSK and you can read CW you surely
> have it backward, I can copy PSK when I can't hear the tones, I'd like to
> see anyone do that with CW. If it's a problem on VHF I strongly suggest
> you trade that noisy front end for some quieter transistors, static and
> hash common on HF play hob with weak signals but it's absent on VHF so
> what's left is receiver thermal noise.
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
