Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: a trace of RN6BN

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: a trace of RN6BN
From: Brian Rogerson <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:18:46 +0000
In-reply-to: <006901c420c9$4200f1d0$e901a8c0@bob2l2u6k2n1g3>
References: <20040411053239.NYFR13120.web4-rme.xtra.co.nz@[127.0.0.1]> <007101c41f87$3ce0ada0$e901a8c0@bob2l2u6k2n1g3> <[email protected]> <009101c42003$f14afa30$e901a8c0@bob2l2u6k2n1g3> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
Bob, my system is fired up to transmit, what frequency is available, I don't want to double?
73, Brian CT1DRP



At 20:03 12/04/2004, you wrote:
Sam RN6BN,

Last night was not so productive, only a trace received in a capture at 1636
UTC.  Nil in all other captures.

Commenting on QRSS vs DFCW, for beaconing the main benefit of DFCW is that
it has a higher "duty cycle" as it avoids the "long gaps" between characters
and words.  Key up time does little for receiver S/N.  Also the frequency
shift can be useful to distinguish a wanted signal from coherent QRM.  For
DX beaconing into ZL, I suggest DFCW120.  For an attempted QSO, DFCW is much
more productive as it makes much better use of time windows.  Our next
booking at ZL6QH/ZM2E is 19 June, so it seems yopu have time to build a good
receiving antenna, hi hi.

For testing tonight, I suggest using DFCW120.

73, Bob ZL2CA



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>