Message-ID: <3C2B6EFB.BCBFB23@ns.sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 13:57:00 -0500
From: "john currie" <john.currie@ns.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Subject: Re: LF: 136
References: <3C2A5DDD.F33E5C02@ns.sympatico.ca> <3C2AF4D6.B7C93C4F@netscapeonline.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Sender: <majordom@post.thorcom.com>

Hi Mal saw you last night also M0BMU
      About QRSS, DFCW es 7 freq .  I find qrss to be very effective.  I
believe DFCW is even more effective than QRSS because you can send info much
faster for the same signal to noise ratio.  This makes sense because although
it takes same time to send a dot but the dashes are 3 times faster.  It does
take up more spectrum space than QRSS but the greater  efficiency will either
get the info across faster during condx of QSB or the transmitter can go
double the dot length and get the info across in the same time as QRSS for 3
db improvement in received SNR.
     The &FSK however takes up 3 times more spectrum space es I dont see any
benefit in speed/SNR improvement
     Jim your signals were received again through most of the night

73 De John VE1ZJ
gii3kev wrote:

> john currie wrote:
>
> > Hi all Saw nil from OM2TW,  but will look more carefully later.  M0BMU
> > was in all night with  the 7 freq format. Seems to take a lot of space
> > .  Why will it be better?
>
> That is what I would also like to know. 7 fsk with tone spacing takes up
> about 14 times more spectrum and is not compatable with others modes on
> close adjacent frequencies, do not see any advantage with dfcw either
> except that it and 7fsk are more noticeable on screen but that does not
> constitute a better signal over noise transmission type or any advantage
> over QRS which takes the minimum bandwith of all the modes to achieve the
> object on a very narrow band.
> A few nights ago someone was testing a data transmission around 135.920
> khz taking up 500 hz of bandwidth, what is coming next !!!!!!!!!
> While experiments with different modes are to be encouraged 136 khz is not
> a suitable band with only 2 khz available, the only suitable mode for this
> band is CW, normal speed and QRS.
> Try the HF and VHF bands or Satellites where there is and abundance of
> spectrum available for mode experimentation.
>
> > G3KEV
> >
> > Valerio,  OM2TW  will be gone on vacation for few days .  Perhaps you
> > can transmit on 135.922 until he is back.  Best time seems to be from
> > 0300 to your sunrise
> >    Let me know if you will be transmitting es I will look for you.
> > 73 all es hny de john VE1ZJ