To: | [email protected] |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: LF: M0BMU WOLF beacon |
From: | John Andrews <[email protected]> |
Date: | Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:07:12 +0000 |
In-reply-to: | <001301c85e05$38a2cd20$681c7ad5@w4o8m9> |
References: | <003601c85bb2$ced17940$0100007f@w4o8m9> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <003701c85c7b$68b9d0c0$99188351@w4o8m9> <000b01c85d35$c99fc4c0$c02a8351@w4o8m9> <000f01c85d41$79d94a40$6901a8c0@AIRPORTTERMINAL> <003501c85db7$61301ac0$f7327ad5@w4o8m9> <001301c85e05$38a2cd20$681c7ad5@w4o8m9> |
Reply-to: | [email protected] |
Sender: | [email protected] |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) |
Jim,JT2, like WOLF, is heavily error-corrected, which seems to be a good thing for weak signal performance at this frequency. JASON is reasonably robust, but with no forward error correction, would be in a much lower category. Take a look at: http://www.w1tag.com/600M_Modes.htmfor some thoughts on what Jay and I have been playing with over here. The bandwidths of some of the modes may strain the rules of propriety -- your call. If you want to try JT2, I can furnish some hints that worked well at the TX and RX ends in our tests. John Andrews, W1TAG DD7PC has suggested JT2, which I don't know much about yet, and I2PHD's "Jason" also seems like a good candidate. Any other suggestions or comments? |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: LF: M0BMU WOLF beacon, Jean-Pierre Méré |
---|---|
Next by Date: | LF: Re: XGR/3 WOLF Tonight, J. B. Weazle McCreath |
Previous by Thread: | Re: LF: M0BMU WOLF beacon, Jean-Pierre Méré |
Next by Thread: | Re: LF: M0BMU WOLF beacon, chastant |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |