On Thu, 2009-10-22 at 09:23 +0200, Rein Couperus wrote:
> > I wonder how many people bother to think about why PSK250 is an
> > especially bad protocol to use on HF and what might be a better
> > choice? There are many hams who don't really understand or realize
> > just how the ionosphere mangles the signal and which types of signals
> > will perform better under different propagation conditions. Maybe
> > after learning that the pskmail sysops will change their operating
> > practices.
>
> This is agressive text, and it shows the author has no clue as to what we are
> doing with pskmail...
>
> We have 5 years experience with this, and we would not be using PSK250 if it
> did not work...
> When it works it is 4x faster than any other mode.
> In those cases where it does not work we are using THOR22 or MFSK32,
> depending on band condx.
> Actually, we use PSK250, PSK125, THOR22, THOR11, THOR8, MFSK32, MFSK16.
> We can switch modes during a session. By using RSID on the servers (using
> fldigi-3.13)
> the mode is no issue anymore.... Still PSK250 Is used 90% of the time...
>
> 73,
>
> Rein PA0R
>
One thing I have found is under adverse conditions in keyboard mode with
the text typed in real time PSK250 can be very bad with little copy but
burst a macro for example and you get 100% copy.
With pskmail the overs will always be in "burst" mode at least for mail
transfers. It has been a few months since I used pskmail.
73 Roger
