Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@troy.blacksheep.org> Received: (qmail 22591 invoked from network); 1 Apr 1999 21:33:42 +0100 Received: from magnet.plus.net.uk (HELO magnet.force9.net) (195.166.128.26) by guiness.force9.net with SMTP; 1 Apr 1999 21:33:42 +0100 Received: (qmail 6475 invoked from network); 1 Apr 1999 20:34:02 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com (194.75.130.70) by magnet.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 1 Apr 1999 20:34:02 -0000 Received: from troy.blacksheep.org ([194.75.183.50] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #3) id 10So6a-0002VN-00; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 21:30:24 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received: (from root@localhost) by troy.blacksheep.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA05523 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:23:22 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from post.thorcom.com (root@post.unica.co.uk [194.75.183.70]) by troy.blacksheep.org (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id WAA05507 for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:23:16 GMT Received: from public2.thorcom.com ([194.75.130.20] ident=root) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #3) id 10So65-0002Ur-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 21:29:53 +0100 Received: from premium.inrete.it ([194.116.9.4] helo=mailer.inrete.it ident=root) by public2.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 2.04 #2) id 10So7W-0003qs-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 21:31:22 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from pc-lab (pcttym02.inrete.it [194.116.9.246]) by mailer.inrete.it (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA08783 for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Thu, 1 Apr 1999 22:21:52 +0200 Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19990401212222.006e97e0@mailer.inrete.it> X-Sender: spin@mailer.inrete.it X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 1999 21:22:22 +0100 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org From: "M. Bruno" <spin@inrete.it> Subject: Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW In-reply-to: <E10Si7A-0002s2-00@mserv1b.u-net.net> References: <37033EDB.63B6BC32@phonakcom.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Sender: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org At 14.51 01/04/99 +0100, Mike Dennison wrote: >This is most interesting. I note that Toni agrees with Marco's >assumption that there is no benefit using longer dots - I presume >that the averaging control was altered to the optimum for each of >these measurements, to perhaps 15 for 3s dots and 50 for 10s. > >My experience on-air is that static bursts are very much reduced >(or even eliminated) when setting the averaging control to a higher >value. It would seem reasonable, then, for 10s dots to work better >under noisy conditions than 3s. > I agree. The 3 sec time is optimal with white noise QRN or short 'cracks', but many time I would have preferred to have 6 or 10 seconds when receiving with Lux or heavy statics. My personal preference is to have no smoothing, and use 300 msec dwell time. My eye-brain SW likes to do the smoothing by itself ... ;-) --------------- My loading coil is restored, I'm QRV for the weekend. 73 to all Marco IK1ODO