Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW

Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW

from [Toni Bdrtschi]

[Permanent Link][Original]

To:	[email protected]
Subject:	Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW
From:	"Toni Bdrtschi" <[email protected]>
Date:	Thu, 01 Apr 1999 19:10:17 +0200
Organization:	Phonak Communications AG
References:	<[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to:	[email protected]
Sender:	<[email protected]>

From HB9ASB, JN36pt


Here some additional remarks concerning the tests:

- The term "blind" means that the Test-TX was sending automatically and

I did not know its text in advance.

- When testing with longer dot periods (10s) I changed the dwell time
and the averaging control to higher values in order to find an optimal
setting.

May be the result will be different under heavy QRN or QRM (Lux-effect)
conditions and show an advantage for longer dot-periods. And it is also

possible that I could get other results with other type of receivers.

73 de Toni

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Toni Bdrtschi Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, P. W. Schnoor Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Toni Bdrtschi <= Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Toni Bdrtschi Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Mike Dennison Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, M. Bruno Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Peter W. Schnoor Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Peter W. Schnoor

Previous by Date:	Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Peter W. Schnoor
Next by Date:	Re: LF: RTTY signal around 137, M. Bruno
Previous by Thread:	Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, P. W. Schnoor
Next by Thread:	Re: LF: AF-filters and CW versus SlowCW, Toni Bdrtschi
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]