Received-SPF: neutral (gmail.com: 193.82.116.20 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org)
Message-ID: <44274990.5000200@w1tag.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 02:10:24 +0000
From: John Andrews <w1tag@w1tag.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (Windows/20051201)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <4426CBD5.6070908@w1tag.com> <018001c65134$885292e0$0b01a8c0@server>
In-Reply-To: <018001c65134$885292e0$0b01a8c0@server>
Subject: Re: LF: Re: XES Dual WOLF again tonight
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

J.B, Lloyd, Bill,

Thanks for the reports.  With the strong signals, it's a little tough to 
make conclusions, but...

J.B. - The WOLF10 results look pretty normal, but the frequency is 
jumping around on the WOLF5 results. I'm guessing that your 8000 Hz 
sampling rate is off. With the strong signals, you'll get copy, but it 
won't build up properly.

Lloyd - Agreed that WOLF5 seems to be the best in that sequence. Again, 
with the strong sigs, this amounts to hair-splitting, doesn't it?

Bill -  The two signals were not started at the same time, and you're 
right that your decoder may frame up more quickly on the "wrong" signal. 
I don't see a big difference in your decodes. Maybe I should try a QRP 
session?

John A.