Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1233; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t0BCfKgX026541 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:41:20 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YAHif-0007P7-13 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:34:13 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YAHie-0007Oy-Od for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:34:12 +0000 Received: from out22-ams.mf.surf.net ([145.0.1.22]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1YAHic-000651-2k for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 12:34:11 +0000 Received: from smtps.utwente.nl (smtp-o2.utsp.utwente.nl [130.89.2.10]) by outgoing1-ams.mf.surf.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id t0BCY7nU028482 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:34:07 +0100 Received: from utwks06146.ad.utwente.nl (utwks06146.ad.utwente.nl [130.89.13.213]) by smtps.utwente.nl (8.13.8) with ESMTP id t0BCY7tD005885 for ; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:34:07 +0100 Received: by utwks06146.ad.utwente.nl (Postfix, from userid 17643373) id 3974045C0B60; Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:34:07 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 13:34:07 +0100 From: Pieter-Tjerk de Boer To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Message-ID: <20150111123406.GA20063@cs.utwente.nl> Mail-Followup-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <20150108220755.GA20377@cs.utwente.nl> <54AF0F8C.8030106@virginbroadband.com.au> <20150110211701.GN29958@cs.utwente.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: utwente-out:default, base:default, @@RPTN) X-CanIt-Geo: ip=130.89.2.10; country=NL; region=Provincie Overijssel; city=Enschede; latitude=52.2195; longitude=6.8912; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=52.2195,6.8912&z=6 X-CanItPRO-Stream: utwente-out:default (inherits from utwente:default,base:default) X-Canit-Stats-ID: 0uNCAy7Hx - ef880a7b6263 - 20150111 (trained as not-spam) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) X-Scan-Signature: 2e2f7cbbe9f38dd7bf3fac4fc012e6fc Subject: Re: LF: Eb/N0 values for amateur modes Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 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 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1943 On Sat, Jan 10, 2015 at 10:13:20PM +0000, Alan Melia wrote: > Hi Pieter, Dave G3YXM and I did some quick and dirty estimations of > QRSS about 10 years ago on 136kHz I cant remember whether we did > DFCW where the main advantage is that it is faster, but the decode > threshold is about the same as QRSS It is a little subjective but > the results seemed reasonably what we might suspect. > > They may be on his web-site still www.wireless.org Found it, at http://www.wireless.org.uk/signoise.htm . No DFCW there though. The QRSS line in my table is based on ON7YD's tests, http://on7yd.strobbe.eu/QRSS/ > I believe someone in the States also did some tests, John W1TAG > could probably help there. They may be on the LWCA web-site. I'd be interested, but can't find something relevant on the LWCA site. B.t.w., what I wrote earlier about DFCW is wrong; I somehow thought DFCW was simply morse code sent using FSK instead of ASK, but it's different, using 2 tones for dots and dashes. Hard to say what this does for the required SNR and Eb/N0 compared to CW, as both the average power and the data rate increase. 73, Pieter-Tjerk, PA3FWM