Message-ID: <B2342A88290B46DC9471240DB795E4A5@AGB>
From: "Graham" <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <4F341AE5.1050704@talktalk.net> <C58324464DB74908908940561AD41698@AGB> <4F342525.1050200@talktalk.net> <A8B9B40838544BDD964CE6620E37E211@AGB> <4F34313C.1080005@talktalk.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F34313C.1080005@talktalk.net>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 21:22:01 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Importance: Normal
Subject: Re: LF: Cats among pigeons
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc1464f343b54439e
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


The  s/n  report  is the  average  of each  decoded  bit  in the  total  tx 
time frame  ..

The  variations may  be  down to  qsb , in that   in the  shorter  time , 
there  where  more  demod's  at  a  higher level  ......  qsb  on  500 
asymmetric  ?, 30 / 45  seconds  up and  60/120  down  .. so  the  short 
mode  will  decode  or  no  decode  , longer time  may  have  a  better 
chance  but will  give a lower  average  level ?

perhaps  two  readings  would  be more  use  , max / min  of the  decode 
..or  as in ros  data  , the  s/n  and the  fade margin ,,ie  range 
.....that's  if the  system  can  produce such a  reading

All these  levels  are  average as  well ..one  day/night  we  might  get a 
clue  as  to  what  process is  going on to  determine  if there  is  data 
in a  time  slot ...  bit  like  entering the  tour-de-France  with a  po-go 
stick  and  coming  in the  first  3 :)

G..

--------------------------------------------------
From: "qrss" <qrss@talktalk.net>
Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 8:49 PM
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Subject: Re: LF: Cats among pigeons

> The worse question you could ask.
>
> The decodes fall off at the same signal level resulting from the same TX 
> Power, however OP8 reports -31dB and OP4 reports -28dB I call that worse. 
> In other words I had a  -37dB report from ON6EO, sounds good but would OP4 
> have been -34dB.
>
> I know you knew what I meant anyway.
>
> E
>
> On 09/02/2012 20:29, Graham wrote:
>> worse ?  is that  worse  as in fails  to  decode or   decodes at  a 
>> worse s/n ? , perhaps  worst  was the  worst  word  to  use to  describe 
>> a worsening  situation , by only  making  things worse ?
>>
>> G..
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "qrss" <qrss@talktalk.net>
>> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 7:57 PM
>> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>> Subject: Re: LF: Cats among pigeons
>>
>>> Yes OP8 decodes but almost always either equal S/N or worse.
>>>
>>> E
>>>
>>> On 09/02/2012 19:40, Graham wrote:
>>>> Interesting  Ed.
>>>>
>>>> I would  go  for  OP2   on 500 , that  was the  speed  that  produced 
>>>> the best  results  at the  start , did  you  have  any  OP8 decodes?
>>>>
>>>> G.
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>>> From: "qrss" <qrss@talktalk.net>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 7:13 PM
>>>> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>>>> Subject: LF: Cats among pigeons
>>>>
>>>>> This one worked before also on the G3ZJO G0KTN path:-
>>>>>
>>>>> After dark QSB starts on 500kHz even OP4 can become a struggle, the 
>>>>> PA0AM path again.
>>>>>
>>>>> 18:52 18105 PA0AM Op1 -22 dB 322 km  Actually on 500kHz
>>>>> 18:50 18105 PA0AM Op2 -25 dB 322 km  Actually on 500kHz
>>>>> 18:41 18105 PA0AM Op2 -18 dB 322 km  Actually on 500kHz
>>>>>
>>>>> This could explain why WSPR does so well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eddie G3ZJO
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>