Message-ID: <4B22410F.1000306@telia.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009 13:54:39 +0100
From: "Johan H. Bodin" <jh.bodin@telia.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E828AC12@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de>
In-Reply-To: <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E828AC12@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de>
Subject: Re: LF: "Gain" between qrss3 and qrss10?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Hi Stefan,

> Or isn't it possible to give such a relation?

Yes, it is not only possible, it is in fact quite simple:
When the speed is reduced by a factor K, the information bandwidth is
also reduced by the same factor. This allows you to use a receiver
bandwidth which is K times narrower without missing any information. The
nice thing is that the noise power passing through this bandwidth is
also K times smaller - The S/N ratio has improved K times (or 10*log(K)
dB if you prefer). In other words, you can reduce the TX power by the
same factor K and still enjoy the same SNR (if RX BW is is also made K
timer narrower).

In visually received QRSS, the receiver bandwidth is equal to the RBW,
the "resolution bandwidth", which is approximately equal to the FFT bin
width (one pixel on Argo).

QRSS30 is 10dB more efficient than QRSS3, in theory at least.

73
Johan SM6LKM

----

Stefan Sch=E4fer wrote:
> Dear LF,=20
> Does anybody know about the "gain" between QRSS3 and QRSS10 or QRSS30?=
 I mean, if the noise in both cases is equal, how much can I reduce my tx=
 pwr when switching from qrss3 to qrss10? Or isn't it possible to give suc=
h a relation?
> And: Was there ever a TA QSO in QRSS3?
> I am new on the reflector, sri ;-)
>=20
> Stefan / DK7FC
>=20
>=20