Return-Path: Received: from rly-mb09.mx.aol.com (rly-mb09.mail.aol.com [172.21.131.167]) by air-mb07.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINMB074-d294aaee3ac368; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:45:34 -0400 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mb09.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMB095-d294aaee3ac368; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 20:45:33 -0400 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1MnM9l-0005d6-2Y for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:44:29 +0100 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1MnM9k-0005cx-CW for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:44:28 +0100 Received: from nina.ucs.mun.ca ([134.153.232.76]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1MnM9a-0004KD-Bf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 15 Sep 2009 01:44:21 +0100 Received: from plato.ucs.mun.ca (plato.ucs.mun.ca [134.153.232.153]) by nina.ucs.mun.ca (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n8F0iB8d000981 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:14:11 -0230 Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 22:14:11 -0230 (NDT) From: jcraig@mun.ca X-X-Sender: jcraig@plato.ucs.mun.ca To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,NO_REAL_NAME=0.55 Subject: Re: LF: Decode Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_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-IP: 193.82.116.20 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Dear Laurence, LF group, This is amazing. Well done Laurence! 73 Joe VO1NA On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Laurence BY3A-KL1X China wrote: > > > > Gus, LF - GE > > > > One successful decode from the "B" SDR IQ receiver and Dell 630 > > > > 2050 -29 0.9 0.503925 0 SMBHZ JO57 40 (reported as BY3X) > > > > Im definately getting better decodes on the SDR/D630 than the R75/Dell 610. Whether this is a result of the A>D loss which the R75 analogue incurs coming down to audio etc - or a true receiver artifact remains to be seen, but its the same on HF as well - Ill swop them over, or parts of the system and will try to see where the improvement is. > > > > Now I know absolutely know that for my listening pleasure the R75 knocks spots on sensitivity and other filtering/AGC/NB over the SDR IQ - but in a highly processed, right on the edge -29/-30 world, heavy noise environment with plenty of RF perhaps the pure D to D SDR makes that little difference. Or it could really be the processing power and divisors between the two computers....lots of variables here so Im still not sure. > > > > Its was really noisy and surprised to get anything -there is a large Typhoon between Hainan Island and Hong Kong which appears to be the largest noise maker. > > > > Cheers > > Laurence in BY3A > > just dawn now in E China. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/171222984/direct/01/