Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+Re\:\s+Slow\s+mode\s+comparisons\s*$/>

Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+Re\:\s+Slow\s+mode\s+comparisons\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: "Alan Melia" <[email protected]>; Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 19:09:51 +0100; Hi Mike, Mmmm I think it might be "horses for courses" on this one. I suspect it would depend mainly on the type of noise. I am finding that for instance John WD2XES and Warren WD2XGJ are transmittin; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00118.html (10,375 bytes)
2. LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: Alberto di Bene <[email protected]>; Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 19:19:00 +0100; Mike, going from QRSS3 to QRSS10, when using Argo, means that the FFT bin size is 4 times smaller, and this results in an increase of 6 dB of SNR, provided the useful signal is still confined into a; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00119.html (9,570 bytes)
3. Re: LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: [email protected]; Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 14:07:40 EST; My half-penny's worth is that the transmitted energy per symbol is 3.3 times larger, giving exactly 5.23 dB improvement ;-) That's assuming that the FFT bandwidth is somewhere near the optimum (0.3; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00120.html (8,776 bytes)
4. Re: LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: "Mike Dennison" <[email protected]>; Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 20:20:56 +0100; going from QRSS3 to QRSS10, when using Argo, means that the FFT bin size is 4 times smaller, and this results in an increase of 6 dB of SNR, provided the useful signal is still confined into a single; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00121.html (10,023 bytes)
5. LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: Alberto di Bene <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2005 01:12:33 +0100; My half-penny's worth is that the transmitted energy per symbol is 3.3 times larger, giving exactly 5.23 dB improvement ;-) That's assuming that the FFT bandwidth is somewhere near the optimum (0.3 H; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00122.html (9,424 bytes)
6. Re: LF: Re: Slow mode comparisons (score: 1): Author: [email protected]; Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 20:20:58 EST; Hi Alberto, a good time of the night to discuss this last 0.8 dB ;-) My reasoning was that when variing the FFT bandwidth around the optimum BW, the readability for a symbol should change only very s; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2005-03/msg00125.html (9,524 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]