From: WarmSpgs@aol.com
Message-ID: <104.ed77668.29668b30@aol.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 23:36:00 EST
Subject: Re: LF: Re: m-FSK: SNR vs bandwidth
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

In a message dated 1/3/02 3:09:33 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
vernall@xtra.co.nz writes:

<< So in summary, I believe that extending LF DX achievements will be best
 served by developing a BPSK or DBPSK scheme. >>

Interesting that we appear to be coming full-circle to what LowFERs in the 
States had been playing with for over a decade.  Yet, what exactly are we 
looking at in the way of practical BPSK?  Low data rates and BPSK are a very 
demanding combination, after all.  Bit rates slower than about 1/second never 
really caught on here.  And where could we get a clear definition of 
Differential BPSK, please?

73,
John KD4IDY