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

Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*LF\:\s+Re\:\s+wsjtx\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: LF: Re: wsjtx (score: 1): Author: Joe Taylor <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:51:40 -0400; Hi Mal and all, JT9 signals should decode at signal levels well below what you can copy on CW or QRSS -- and with much larger information content. If you believe you have examples of JT9 receptions t; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-10/msg00228.html (9,147 bytes)
2. Re: LF: Re: wsjtx (score: 1): Author: Joe Taylor <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 11:19:21 -0400; Hi Mal and all, OK. The problem could also be at the Rx end, or it could be a fault in the decoder. If you save the data, we can find out which. Otherwise, we will be no wiser. I have never needed to; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-10/msg00444.html (9,808 bytes)
3. Re: LF: Re: wsjtx (score: 1): Author: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:14:02 +0100; Hi Joe The signals were good on the waterfall with me. I did not save any of the data since I was just experimenting. of course the problem could have been at the TX end. Any data modes that I have l; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-10/msg00504.html (10,218 bytes)
4. LF: Re: wsjtx (score: 1): Author: "mal hamilton" <[email protected]>; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:11:35 +0100; Still no decode on 501.5 Khz but good waterfall display. Pity it was not CW or QRSS then I could get an ID I have now given up and back to HF DX on CW nothing exciting on either LF or MF at present d; /rsgb_lf_group-archives/html/rsgb_lf_group/2012-10/msg00554.html (9,515 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]