Envelope-to: dave@picks.force9.co.uk Delivery-date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:11:15 +0000 Received: by ptb-mxcore14.plus.net with spam-scanned (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1EbinS-0006KM-VW for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:11:15 +0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore14.plus.net with esmtp (PlusNet MXCore v2.00) id 1EbinS-0006KC-Qs for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:11:14 +0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1EbimF-0006vp-3C for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:09:59 +0000 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1EbimD-0006vg-LU for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:09:57 +0000 Received: from [63.240.77.82] (helo=sccrmhc12.comcast.net) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1EbjvS-0005IB-Lf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 19:23:35 +0000 Received: from AIRPORTTERMINAL (c-67-177-102-19.hsd1.ct.comcast.net[67.177.102.19]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <200511141809120120023nove>; Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:09:12 +0000 Message-ID: <002a01c5e947$e53da760$6901a8c0@AIRPORTTERMINAL> From: "Jay Rusgrove" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <67398444.20051114165749@t-online.de> <001701c5e936$9c06e310$020aa8c0@Laptop> <4378C41C.90803@freenet.de> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 13:18:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Subject: Re: LF: Re: TA Nov, 13/14th Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 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-PN-SpamFiltered: by PlusNet MXCore (v2.00) Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit

Wolf, John & other WOLFmen

Another 2 cents...

Did not notice any improvement receiving XES running 2.5 vs 10. Since we're so close I have taken to using a "calibrated" clip lead for the antenna to reduce his signal to puny weak levels.

My initial run showed no improvement so I immediately began looking for operator errors...but didn't find any.

John...looking forward to some high speed tests!

Jay, W1VD

----- Original Message -----

From: Wolf DL4YHF

To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

Sent: Monday, November 14, 2005 12:06 PM

Subject: Re: LF: Re: TA Nov, 13/14th

Greetings all,

John wrote:

>
> XES did run in the WOLF 2.5 speed all night. I will use the 5 b/s rate
> tonight with 50 watts, starting around 2330 UTC. Given WOLF's error
> correction with copy being built up over a period of time, the slower
> data rate may not be an advantage, as it is with uncorrected PSK.
>
This was also my impression when thinking about the lowest useful
signalling rate. 2.5 b/s may give the WOLF decoder too few bits over a
single lift in propagation to recognize the sync pattern; furthermore:
the lower the bitrate, the larger the requirements for frequency
stability (which includes the 'calibration' of the soundcard sampling
rate). I didn't check if the tolerance range isn't also divided by four
when the signalling rate is divided by four.
John - please let me know any results of your local tests. Maybe there
are one or two quirks in my modifications of Stewart's original
algorithm, especially concerning the scaling of the 'frequency
tolerance' parameter.

73, Wolf DL4YHF .

P.S: Off-frequency posting ... I will be watching 3597.000 kHz tonight
in WOLF 5 mode, starting around 19:00 UT .