Klaus,
Interesting > '''(3) I am working on a digital mode for minimal QSOs. ''''
What is your definition of 'minimal' ?
Are you testing the mode on air ?
Rgds
Graham ..
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Klaus von der Heide" <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, December 27, 2008 10:53 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: LF: Re: WSPR and CW
Hello friends,
my comments to the discussion WSPR vs. CW:
(1) Modes only can be compared at a specified data rate.
Of course, CW is "better" than every thinkable digital
mode if we allow it to be slowed down until something
can be identified on the screen. What really counts is
the duration of a random QSO.
(2) Modes only can be compared at a specified error rate.
Try to communicate completely unknown messages! The
symbol error rate of CW at it's ultimate snr is
relatively high. Getting confidence in a callsign
needs a low symbol error rate, i.e. a good snr.
(3) I am working on a digital mode for minimal QSOs.
In simulations with Gaussian noise and Rayleigh fading
it is 1 dB above the Shannon limit. On-off-keying as
used by CW by principle cannot reach that.
Wishing the best for 2009,
73 de Klaus, DJ5HG
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.0/1865 - Release Date:
12/26/2008 13:01
| 