Hi Paul, Markus and Domenico, Group. There is sill something fishy in the Arduino, but there is one less instance of shoddy programming. Please forgive me. My cat is about to disown me because of my
Joe, got her! Partial decode of the first half of the first transmission, at 21:10. Very nice! 73, Markus (DF6NM) --Ursprüngliche Mitteilung-- Von: jcraig <[email protected]> An: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_g
Success! 21:00 message decoded re-encode 130/608 ber 2.14e-01 Es/N0=-5.0 Eb/N0=6.6 Now I am privileged to know the secret of the cat's name. -- Paul Nicholson --
Well done, Markus! (your RX and assistance to me). She's delighted and her faith in me restored. Thanks ! Joe, Â got her! Partial decode of the first half of the first transmission, at 21:10. Â Ver
Your reported carrier Eb/N0 = 0.93 dB but the symbol errors give Eb/N0 = 9.5 dB Have you got some other signal in the passband of the I/Q signal? -- Paul Nicholson --
Hi Paul, EbNaut is amazing. There was some arcing with the aerial so I've switched to the old one. Thanks for your patience and all the fun. Joe Success! 21:00 message decoded re-encode 130/608 ber 2
I just realised from your log Markus, you ran the decoder on half a message. I guess the interleaving is doing its job then. I'm not sure the symbol error counter is reporting correctly when half the
Here's the "official" decode of the full sequence, ending 21:21. Today there's more QRN but not an issue. Thanks to you and Paul for the fine work, compliments to Tangles - she's famous now! 73, Mark
Hello, a little signal, but decoded also here . Hope to increase Eb/N0 for the next transmissions. Compliments Joe. (i don't have a cat, but if i will own one in the future, maybe his name should be
Paul, I think it's just an artifact from the file ending in the middle of the sequence. It seems that non-existing symbols with null amplitude are not being counted as symbol errors, which severely b
Hi Domenico and it's impressive that the signals reached you so early. Tangles is a big fan of Marconi! She's delighted her name made it to Italy and your's truly is very grateful for the report. I'v
Excellent result. That's the sort of test I like to see, where Eb/N0 = 0.7 dB and the program will have had to search for the phase and it had to use some list decoding. That's a proper weak signal t
And any proper test will sometimes fail ;-) No success here on the 21:30 transmission, only a couple of bogus decodes with very high rank numbers. The signal is competely invisible now, and to make t
The timing is off by a few seconds: the 2200 sequence ended at 22:20:19. I think the old antenna is several dB down and that isn't helping things. Oh well, at least the message arrived! It was very m
Yes it seems to be loosing a few seconds - 22:00 and 22:30 decoded alright but had to shift the timing (though I don't trust my timestamps too much any more). start Eb/N0 time offset UT dB seconds 21
My timing is off a bit too. I expected a 0.1 - 0.2 for the propagaion delay of CHU and about the same for my reaction time, but a whole second seems like a lot. It's time to get GPS or a clock from t
Thanks to all for the interesting tests. But we are battling with clocks and oscillators rather than propagation and noise. At least with EbNaut nobody can complain that the operator is just installi
Signal got better later, and is still visible as a blue haze in last night's TA spectrograms https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26404526/LF_old/LF_lastnight.htm . All messages up to 2 UT decoded nic
Moving to 496.4Hz now ? Frequency expressed in dB has to take the 10.LOG form, not 20.LOG Consider P = kTB 'jnt Thanks also from here to all participants (feline and human)! Next step - reduce freq
