Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 X-Spam-DCC: EATSERVER: mailn 1166; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by lipkowski.org (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u1) with ESMTP id v1QLYbb1009639 for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:34:39 +0100 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1ci6PZ-0003IL-Gp for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:31:21 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1ci6PZ-0003I8-35 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:31:21 +0000 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1ci6PV-0006yQ-Su for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 21:31:19 +0000 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1F47D20AED for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:31:17 +0100 (CET) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 3vWdLr5L72zybC for ; Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:31:16 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <58B34924.6060005@posteo.de> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 22:31:16 +0100 From: DK7FC User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <58B34590.3030802@posteo.de> In-Reply-To: <58B34590.3030802@posteo.de> X-Scan-Signature: 7001055fa59a9c23b9831ea6d317a074 Subject: Re: VLF: 16K19A? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.75 Status: RO X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 10729 ...another point: I tried to understand as much as possible from http://abelian.org/ebnaut/results.shtml 16k is convincing. What about 32K? No significant additional advantage or not practicable for normal PCs? Also it would be interesting to see graphs for the message success rate = f (Eb/No) for various list lengths. In my recent transmissions i'm playing with the CRC value so that the optimum list length is in a range of 100000. It would be interesting to see which difference a list length of e.g. 200000 makes. In my transmission which is running right now, going from CRC14 to CRC15 would mean a doubling (ish) of the list length. The transmission time would just have been 6 minutes longer... 73, Stefan Am 26.02.2017 22:16, schrieb DK7FC: > Hi Paul, > > Why is there no mode called 16K19A? Would that combination make no > sense? With messages longer than 12 characters i may come to a > critical value for most EbNaut decoders, so i will need to switch to > 8K19A. > Switching from 8K21A to 16K21A has an advantage (using the same > transmission time), as far as i understand... > > 73, Stefan > > PS: Here i'm preparing for transmissions on lower frequencies again... >