Return-Path: Received: from rly-mc03.mx.aol.com (rly-mc03.mail.aol.com [172.21.164.87]) by air-mc02.mail.aol.com (v126.13) with ESMTP id MAILINMC024-d654b250d4645; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:50:50 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mc03.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMC035-d654b250d4645; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:50:32 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1NJqgr-0004Sx-2Y for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:48:57 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1NJqgq-0004So-LA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:48:56 +0000 Received: from mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.48]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1NJqhL-0004XS-7g for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:49:28 +0000 Received: from aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20091213154927.QLFB27507.mtaout02-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:49:27 +0000 Received: from [192.168.2.33] (really [82.22.242.219]) by aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vG.2.02.00.01 201-2161-120-102-20060912) with ESMTP id <20091213154927.FNIX13254.aamtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@[192.168.2.33]> for ; Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:49:27 +0000 From: "Mike Dennison" To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Sun, 13 Dec 2009 15:49:22 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <4B250D02.733.14E9A34@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-reply-to: <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E828AC12@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de> References: <1260444821.6353.65.camel@vaio3rd>, <38A51B74B884D74083D7950AD0DD85E828AC12@File-Server-HST.hst.e-technik.tu-darmstadt.de> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (4.41) Content-description: Mail message body X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=ZtHxNT4mZm3rCuM0SmWmgWxeBwJsziC8EqOrwwVkrhA= c=1 sm=0 a=0WSUxHMXFWIA:10 a=9YlaCzn6_68A:10 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=26arz0xHYuwx9Tws_60A:9 a=R7a7poSOAvNoGjkAtyUEELdpt_4A:4 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 X-Karma: unknown: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: "Gain" between qrss3 and qrss10? Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII 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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 See my web page: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/mike.dennison/index/lf/gallery/dl3zid.htm for an illustration of the difference between QRSS3 and QRSS10 on a marginal signal. Mike, G3XDV ========== > Does anybody know about the "gain" between QRSS3 and QRSS10 or QRSS30? > I mean, if the noise in both cases is equal, how much can I reduce my > tx pwr when switching from qrss3 to qrss10? Or isn't it possible to > give such a relation? And: Was there ever a TA QSO in QRSS3? I am new > on the reflector, sri ;-) > > Stefan / DK7FC > >