Return-Path: Received: from mtain-dc03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtain-dc03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.64.131]) by imd-db07.r1000.mx.aol.com (Inbound Mail Deferral) with ESMTP id 7EF0F70000099 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 07:55:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dc03.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id C5ECF3800008C; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 07:55:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1RkEjZ-0007F3-90 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:53:53 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1RkEjY-0007Eu-RN for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:53:52 +0000 Received: from fmmailgate05.web.de ([217.72.192.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1RkEjW-0004vg-FP for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 09 Jan 2012 12:53:52 +0000 Received: from web.de by fmmailgate05.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD3968D6224 for ; Mon, 9 Jan 2012 13:53:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from [84.63.111.3] by mwmweb063 with HTTP; Mon Jan 09 13:53:44 CET 2012 Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 13:53:44 +0100 (CET) From: =?UTF-8?Q?=22Horst_St=C3=B6cker=22?= To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <602777056.2382215.1326113624582.JavaMail.fmail@mwmweb063> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/cc30JYAvWm/iBcRcUMd9fvxCFFO85aDNTGwjUo9kldxiaNjcFC9I8 MLi+obLzPe4P8rOLgc9K2ha8hFAfuA+K X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_IMAGE_ONLY_28=1.014,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.001,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: QRS V Opera Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, MIME_HTML_ONLY,PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false x-aol-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 1:2:425938528:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 1 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40834f0ae3a6092b X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This question would better be answered by the author but by myself.
But first the decode section of the program might help OPERA to reception of weaker signals. In the case that you can hear the carrier in CW QRSS is also obsolete.
As Morse code is optimized for by ear reception OPERA will generate shorter transmissions due to its data code.
And another thing is the link to the www. Someano may dislike that, but to me it's an advantage.
Unfortunately at the moment one will have mor "listeners" in QRSS than in OPERA. And I will keep on transmitting QRSS in the future. But OPERA is an interesting mode to me - maybe more than other because of the fact that you can use nearly any transmitter.
At least this is classical diskussion in HAM radio about nearly any new mode.
Coding new modes is one kind of experiment. Useful or not, is not the right question. With this view on HAM radio there is nothing useful but cell phone and www.
Horst
DO1KHS/DI2AN

Von: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
Gesendet: 09.01.2012 13:10:28
An: rsgb <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Betreff: LF: QRS V Opera

MF/LF

What advantage has Opera over QRSS. So far all Opera signals I have observed would be perfect copy in QRSS mode and in most cases are also Audible and suitable for CW

also

CW es QRSS are a more simple and straight forward procedure both to TX es RX .

g3kev

SMS schreiben mit WEB.DE FreeMail - einfach, schnell und
kostenguenstig. Jetzt gleich testen! http://f.web.de/?mc=021192