Return-Path: Received: from rly-dc04.mx.aol.com (rly-dc04.mail.aol.com [172.19.136.33]) by air-dc10.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDC104-b17494fb00933e; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:20:00 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-dc04.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDC043-b17494fb00933e; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:19:40 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LEmYQ-00036w-NM for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 15:18:46 +0000 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LEmYP-00036n-K2 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 15:18:45 +0000 Received: from outbound03.telus.net ([199.185.220.222]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LEmYM-0006ml-D2 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 15:18:45 +0000 Received: from priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net ([75.157.142.148]) by priv-edtnes29.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20081222151737.XUIS3234.priv-edtnes29.telusplanet.net@priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net> for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 08:17:37 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.66] (d75-157-142-148.bchsia.telus.net [75.157.142.148]) by priv-edtnaa06.telusplanet.net (BorderWare Security Platform) with ESMTP id D6B218003C1A382B for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 08:18:39 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <494FAFCE.8060100@telus.net> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:18:38 -0800 From: Scott Tilley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <000701c962f1$b79b04c0$4201a8c0@home> <016901c963c8$1c543720$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <494EE0A8.5040607@telus.net> <004501c963cf$24a20db0$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <000901c96356$9dffe3e0$4201a8c0@home> <006601c96428$a8c6cc80$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> In-Reply-To: <006601c96428$a8c6cc80$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: 500kHz WSPR Beacon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS 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-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) MAL wrote "..., which takes up a lot less bandwidth." Wrong, unless the little world you live in doesn't obey the laws of Physics and you really believe CW takes no BW. Most if not all viable digi modes on 600m operate in such a manner that they do not generate bandwidth wasting sidebands like even the best CW transmitters do by the simple nature of the keying. Worst case a PSK31 signal occupies 32Hz. A WSPR signal occupies 6Hz. Both modes allow for many QSOs or beacons in a small sliver of the band. I see no reason that any of these modes cannot coexist with little or no impact on each other or CW aficionados pursuing their passion. http://fermi.la.asu.edu/w9cf/articles/click/index.html If the above is alittle too much for your small mind try this simple rule of thumb: /CW Bandwidth/ = wpm X 4 So assuming your bluster is true and you are the world's best CW op, your bandwidth is surly more than any digi mode currently in use on the band and you should either slow down or go QRT if you really believe your logic. I await your further ramblings on how you've saved the world with CW and we're all lessor men for just not getting it... With luck you'll stop wasting internet bandwidth with your nonsense. 73 Scott VE7TIL