[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]
Re: Digital Radios
- Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] Digital Radios
- From: Jonathan NAYLOR <Jonathan.Naylor@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 11 Jan 2002 14:49:08 +0100
- Alternate-Recipient: Allowed
- Conversion: Allowed
- Disclose-Recipients: Prohibited
- Original-Encoded-Information-Types: IA5-Text
- X400-Content-Type: P2-1988 ( 22 )
- X400-MTS-Identifier: [/c=FR/admd=ATLAS/prmd=SG/; 029EC3C3EED540EE-MTAFEDDEF]
- X400-Originator: Jonathan.Naylor@socgen.com
- X400-Received: by mta MTAFEDDEF in /c=FR/admd=ATLAS/prmd=SG/; Relayed; 11 Jan 2002 14:49:08 +0100
- X400-Received: by /c=FR/admd=ATLAS/prmd=SG/; Relayed; 11 Jan 2002 14:49:08 +0100
- X400-Recipients: non-disclosure;
> This is especially true for slow speed textual communications, as
> contrary to popular amateur folklore CW is actually *extremely*
> power-inefficient for the data rate it supports.
Thats not how I have ever seen it. CW is very good for very weak signal
working requiring minimum equipment for maximum readability under weak
signal conditions.
Amateur Radio is not the Internet, the signalling speed is often far less
important than making a minimal contact. That is the essence of DX work
on most bands. EME is very power inefficient, so what ?
Jonathan HB9DRD/G4KLX
----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
AMSAT Home