Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 6ED94380000F9; Tue, 3 Jan 2012 13:10:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Ri8o3-0003TL-Up for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:09:51 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Ri8o3-0003TC-I2 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:09:51 +0000 Received: from out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.243]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Ri8o1-0003hY-H1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 03 Jan 2012 18:09:51 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjETAPdDA09cF/hn/2dsb2JhbABDggWHRqIAgRKBBoFtBQEBBQgBAQNJAiwBAQMFAgEDEQQBAQEJJRQBBAgSBhYIBhMKAQICAQGHa7VWiHWDGgSIBIUsAZJAh0U X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,451,1320624000"; d="scan'208";a="20058116" Received: from host-92-23-248-103.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.23.248.103]) by out1.ip07ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 03 Jan 2012 18:09:31 +0000 Message-ID: <009e01ccca42$d7740920$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <780955996.1040888.1325583040480.JavaMail.fmail@mwmweb057><4F033DF2.90107@usa.net> Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2012 18:09:19 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: OPERA - why it's less data than normal CW ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" 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-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:463272224:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1db4084f0344ae36ef X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Nothing wrong with Manchester.Could the problem be south of Watford Junction ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Talbot" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 5:55 PM Subject: Re: LF: OPERA - why it's less data than normal CW ? Until I deleted every last trace of the software after discovering it was sending IP packets, I had started analysing the Tx sequence to see if it made any sense For any given sub-mode, the Tx slots are all equal length, so allocate a 0 and1 to each Tx state. If you do an autocorrelation on the resulting sequence, (by XORing a delayed version of the pattern with itself) some interesting longer sequences show up - always an even number of 1's' and 0's' for example. It almost has a vague Manchester Coding feel to it. But all analysis is stopped and will permanently stay so until a version appears that will not send IP packets. It was much easier to 'crack' WSJT coding - just a case of reading the source code :-) 'jnt On 3 January 2012 17:42, Alberto di Bene wrote: > On 1/3/2012 10:36 AM, Andy Talbot wrote: > > If 'someone' would publish the innards of that mode, a simple Tx only > keyer could surely be developed, and te mode woue be useful > > And maybe somebody could even adventure in writing an Rx program... > but of course the protocol needs to be completely open source for this. > > 73 Alberto I2PHD > >