Return to KLUBNL.PL main page
| To: | [email protected] |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: LF: RTTY vs.MFSK |
| From: | Stefan Schäfer <[email protected]> |
| Date: | Wed, 06 Mar 2013 17:18:04 +0100 |
| In-reply-to: | <[email protected]> |
| References: | <[email protected]> <DF81F8D10F134701B797824F9B93DA4F@PcMinto> <CF6C61F12A384E648C56408F22F5083F@gnat> <A084B9DCD8B34898B4DD484086406269@PcMinto> <[email protected]> <84B77AD08F5F42849E6492B9048EC349@IBM7FFA209F07C> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> |
| Reply-to: | [email protected] |
| Sender: | [email protected] |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 |
Am 06.03.2013 17:12, schrieb Stefan Schäfer: [...]I will now switch to MFSK-4, same QRG. Sorry, aborted. It is much to slow and so it is uninteresting when thinking about a real QSO mode.. How fast is AMTOR?? 73, Stefan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: LF: RTTY vs.MFSK, jrusgrove |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | LF: Re: Testing RTTY 478.200kHz, Chris |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: RTTY vs.MFSK, jrusgrove |
| Next by Thread: | Re: LF: RTTY vs.MFSK, g3zjo |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |