Return-Path: Received: from rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (rly-yb02.mail.aol.com [172.18.205.134]) by air-yb04.mail.aol.com (v120.9) with ESMTP id MAILINYB41-181472ee76f343; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 04:50:54 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-yb02.mx.aol.com (v120.9) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINYB25-181472ee76f343; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 04:50:41 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1IoyaT-0004I7-6a for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:49:41 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1IoyaS-0004Hy-Q5 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:49:40 +0000 Received: from sighthound.demon.co.uk ([80.177.174.126]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IoyaQ-0001kM-5u for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 05 Nov 2007 09:49:40 +0000 Received: from saluki.ngw.uk.com (unknown [192.168.1.4]) by lurcher.twatt.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEAD5DA4D8 for ; Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:49:09 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:47:22 +0000 From: John GM4SLV To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <20071105094722.7d6531be@saluki.ngw.uk.com> In-Reply-To: <000701c81e48$e7e8ee60$14e4fc3e@g3kev> References: <00bd01c81e2c$b6825c10$f7636a58@wgt01> <000701c81e48$e7e8ee60$14e4fc3e@g3kev> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Karma: 0: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: Re: 500 KHz test Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_helo : X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: listenair ; SPF_822_from : On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 18:36:59 -0000 "hamilton mal" wrote: > All class A UK radio amateurs have passed the code test, so why > bother with a mode that noone else bothers about. > G3KEV As a CW only op I think I can answer Mal's point without being accused of partiality. The use of CW is always going to be seen as the primary mode on MF, due to the bandwidth limitiations and the ease of production and detection. However the great increase in available digital modes recently means there's great scope for the experimenter to investigate ways of improving the reliability and throughput of messages in narrow bandwidths and low S/N ratios. One of the reasons I see that we've got access to 500 is to see what can be done with modern DSP signal processing in view of the peculiarities of MF fading/propagation. The powers that be might see MF (and an amateur allocation here) as useful for emergency communication. The use of digital modes and DSP will be important for this and if we can show we're carrying out research into this then we won't look like anachronistic dinosaurs. On my part I'm only interested in using CW for QSOs - and am still amassing lots of interesting data from this mode - but am happy to support those who are trying different routes. This isn't a normal amateur allocation where we should be intertested solely in "working the DX". The cross-band QSOs etc. should be seen as "experimantal data". The normal amateur "DXCC chasing" mentality has no place here. See you on the key? John