Message-ID: <000101c2336a$e10a6520$1072073e@main>
From: "Alan Melia" <Alan.Melia@btinternet.com>
To: "LF-Group" <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: LF: Jason timing
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 19:14:32 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

Hi all, MMmmm yes I agree there is probably no advantage to be gained in the
decoder if the decoding is not synchronous, however it was somewhat
frustrating in watching the weak signal from Johan the other night on 80m to
see bits of tone 'uncovered' as the noise subsided but get no letter decode
for many element periods. It might have been easier to decode by eye. I got
the feeling that the decoder  "lost the plot" on occasions. The tone step
was often very distinct on the waterfall, but still no character was
displayed. The cursor did not advance, as it was waiting for a strong signal
to appearfor a full element. This is probably a function of the
characteristics of the noise, very loud crashes, sometimes in bursts but
often a couple of quiet minutes. Unfortunately this was done late at night
and I did not record any of it.

It will obviously be interesting to try the new version with the two
decoders when Johan fires up again. The effects of the static were very
similar to that we experience on LF but there was I think some fading on 80m
as well.

Cheers de Alan G3NYK
alan.melia@btinternet.com