Message-ID: <4957D573.6090301@telus.net>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 11:37:23 -0800
From: Scott Tilley <sthed475@telus.net>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <4956BFEE.19110.2EE6D21@v.d.heide.on-line.de> <001601c968e6$912297e0$4201a8c0@home> <011801c968f3$a64c4e10$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920>
In-Reply-To: <011801c968f3$a64c4e10$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: WSPR and CW
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


All this is evidence of your lack of skill in the setup of your own 
station nothing more nothing less...

mal hamilton wrote:
>
> YOU OBVIOUSLY HAVE NOT SEEN MY REPORTS RECENTLY.
> I OFTEN COPY THE USA STATIONS AUDIBLE AND LOUD ON CW AS WELL AS THE 
> QRS3 TRANSMSSIONS.
> WHEN YOU WERE STRUGGLING A FEW NIGHTS AGO ON WSPR I WAS SEEING THE 
> SIGNAL TRACE SOLID INSPITE OF SOME SLOW QSB AND HAD XGR/2 BEEN ON QRS3 
> I CERTAINLY COULD HAVE HAD A QSO AS I DID A COUPLE OF NIGHTS LATER, 
> XGR/2 OOO COPY.
> This is the situation at my QTH obviously your RX set up needs 
> tweaking. An other disadvantage of wspr is the accurate time sync 
> required for a decode plus frequency accuracy, NOT the case with 
> ON/OFF keyed morse slow or fast. All things considered there is 
> nothing to date to beat CW in its many formats.
> On the HF bands I have noticed an increase in hand sent and auto CW 
> commercial acty, CW is certainly not going away, and during contests 
> on the amateur bands one can hardly find a slot to TX.
> There are digital modes also about but they seem to be slow at 
> overtaking CW, most are obviously not convinced.
> mal/g3lev
>
>