Return-Path: Received: (qmail 12761 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2001 09:04:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by 10.226.25.101 with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 09:04:35 -0000 Received: (qmail 25659 invoked from network); 17 Apr 2001 09:04:25 -0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 17 Apr 2001 09:04:25 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14pRIv-0001Qv-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:57:45 +0100 Received: from mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be ([134.58.10.6]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14pRIs-0001Qp-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:57:42 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 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 KAA390720 for ; Tue, 17 Apr 2001 10:57:13 +0200 Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20010417095837.2197dc50@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be> X-Sender: pb623250@mail.cc.kuleuven.ac.be X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (16) Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 09:58:37 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "Rik Strobbe" Subject: Re: LF: DFCW, an idea. In-reply-to: <001001c0c64c$3aed0580$bc31893e@g3aqc> 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: Hello Laurie & group, >I have thought about synchronising the Tx and Rx using some form of universal >time signal but 1) this might be thought as cheating and 2) the path >variations, phase changes etc would be a problem. So my point is WHY BOTHER ! >would it not still be possible to read the message without these gaps (they are >hardly there anyway). My suggestion is to use 'time synchronzed' QRSS or DFCW. Whith 'time synchronized' I mean that any dot/dash will start at a known time (eg. if you use 60 seconds dots a dot/dash will always start at the full minute, for 30 seconds dots it would be at the full minute of the half minute. This requires sufficient accurate timing at TX and RX side. But at dotlengths of 30 seconds upwards (as used in TA tests) a 1 second accuracy would be sufficient, and this can be achieved by setting the PC clock manualy with teh radio-signal clock (eg DFC77) as reference. What would be the advantages : 1. No more needs for gaps, even the 5, H, 0 etc can be copied without doubt 2. No more need for 'over-FFT-ing' at the RX software : Software as ARGO is taking FFT's at a rate of several per second while in principle only 1 FFT per dot is sufficient, provided the FFT bin contains exact 1 dot (or space). Maybe the 'calculating power' of the PC can be used to analyze this one FFT instead of making many FFT's of the same dot. I refer to DF4YHF's software (Spectrum Lab) where one can manualy change the 'reference level' and 'dynamic range'. I found that this can be very usefull to 'dig in the noise'. Based on this experience I believe that some kind of 'intelligent AGC' (that controls reference level and AGC) can improve SNR. Regarding 'cheating' : making skeds with very accurate arrangements of the transmitting periodes is common practice for EME, MS etc... so I don't think that this will be a problem on LF. 73, Rik ON7YD