Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9405 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2001 17:13:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 19 Feb 2001 17:13:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 313 invoked from network); 19 Feb 2001 17:13:44 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 19 Feb 2001 17:13:44 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14UtnH-0007jX-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:08:11 +0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14Utn4-0007jS-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 17:07:59 +0000 Received: from LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be (LCBD15.fys.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.80.15]) by mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (8.9.3/8.9.0) with SMTP id SAA86346 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:07:32 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20010219180729.333f6882@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 18:07:29 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: Slower and slower In-reply-to: <3A9144F9.27870.17F5A6B@localhost> References: <6454168.982595788787.JavaMail.imail@bronty> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: At 16:08 19/02/01 -0000, G3XDV wrote: >There's nothing to stop you integrating a signal over days, except >that the frequency stability and accuracy required (not the same >thing) gets tighter and tighter. With tools as ARGO you can watch a 'frequency window' that is many hundred times the resolution, so I believe that accuracy is not so critical as the frequency stability. To take optimal advantage of ARGO the TX (and RX) stability needs to be better than 1/dotlength over the duration of a dash. So for 300 sec. dots / 600 sec. dashes the combined drift (of TX and RX) must be better than 0.003Hz over 10 minutes. Assuming the worst case (TX and RX drifting in opposite directions, as favoured by our old friend Murphy) the stability of both TX and RX should be better than 0.0015Hz over 10 minutes, what equals 0.01ppm (or a drift of 0.1Hz at a 10MHz reference oscillator). I'm not a specialist in oscillator stability, but it seems to me that a making a reference that fullfills this requirements is in the category 'difficult but not impossible'. Using DFCW instead of QRSS will reduce the QSO time to abt. 1/3 and the required stability to 1/2 (0.02ppm). More sophisticated methods (FDK etc..) might even give better results. Another question : how stable will the signal be after passing trough the ionosphere ? Will the doppler shift be less than 0.01ppm ? But please, don't let the above let anybody stop experimenting. One year ago not even the wildest mind would have thought about a QSO between G and VE3 that would take several days ... and now it is a fact ! 73, Rik ON7YD