Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6998 invoked from network); 11 May 2000 18:25:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by grants.core.plus.net.uk with SMTP; 11 May 2000 18:25:38 -0000 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12pxYt-0006ts-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Thu, 11 May 2000 19:19:51 +0100 Received: from mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk ([194.200.20.13]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12pxYr-0006tn-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 11 May 2000 19:19:49 +0100 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from as31-s16-147-207.cwci.net ([195.44.147.207] helo=netscapeonline.co.uk) by mailhost.netscapeonline.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.02 #1) id 12pxYY-0004Y5-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 11 May 2000 18:19:30 +0000 Message-ID: <391AE0E6.F55B3603@netscapeonline.co.uk> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 16:33:42 +0000 From: "g3kev" Organization: Netscape Online member X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en-gb]C-CCK-MCD NetscapeOnline.co.uk (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: en-GB,en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject: Re: LF: Spectran accuracy References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: > > > > G3KEV replied: > > Tell me Rik, why is there no qrss(LMCW) when the band is noisy like lots > > of qrn/static about. > > My ANSWER after monitoring and experimentation with > > spectran is that the qrn chops the long dashes and you cannot > > be sure if it was lots of dots. > > On the contrary, Had you been listening today you might change your mind. I tuned to a weak steady carrier and the QRN was so consistant that it chewed it up completely. Not just intermittent crashes but the STATIC was virtually continuous. I then worked G8RW and gave him 259. It was a struggle but on normal cw I made it. I was monitoring him on spectrogram and NO way would it have been possible to read his signals visually and make any sense of the transmission. I tried all permutations of spectrogram and it made little difference. My observations in the past indicate that the band has to be relatively quiet to see weak signals and read the information, and most of the time is it guesswork, because you already know in advance who is going to be active. Say what you like about the so called advantages of slow morse. I have yet to see anyone attempting a qso under the conditions that I have described above, and I always monitor for slow morse as well as normal activities. The slow morse activity that I do see can easily be copied aurally at my qth. Maybe my antenna is above average. I have yet to see a qso on slow cw that I cannot copy both ends by ear. G3KEV > I find that the advantage of QRSS is even greater > under heavy QRN - it's often the only mode that is viable in the > summer. Static crashes are usually much shorter than the dot > period and it is much easier to watch the bright white lines of static > than to listen to QRN. I cannot vouch for Spectran, but > Spectrogram works well under these conditions. > > Mike, G3XDV (IO91VT) > http://www.dennison.demon.co.uk/activity.htm