Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Re: Opera v qrs evaluation

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Re: Opera v qrs evaluation
From: qrss <[email protected]>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:16:58 +0000
In-reply-to: <3A9A60CAE4EB4355A5B0A30CDA0F450A@JimPC>
References: <006201cce044$06c16f80$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <3A9A60CAE4EB4355A5B0A30CDA0F450A@JimPC>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1

Hi Jim

It's still on, I see lots of de-codes from you, it will be interesting to hear your findings.

I like QRS Morse, I have used it extensively, just look at the e-mail I post to the group with, since WSPR and now OPERA it has become clear that it does not serve me well, on HF I put it down to the tiny network of RX stations who look/listen when they have the time or the inclination not necessarily when the propagation is there.

On LF with the high proportion of QRS advocates you would not expect the same situation.

73 Eddie

On 31/01/2012 18:35, James Moritz wrote:
Dear Eddie, LF Group,

In an attempt to actually make a comparison, I have set my RX to the 500kHz WSPR frequency, with Spec Lab going also. Since it has been running, G3ZJO's QRSS3 has been about 10 - 15dB SNR in 0.3Hz FFT resolution, so say about 6dB above the level needed for "good copy". Opera has so far reported SNR between -23 and -27dB - I don't know how this relates to the detection threshold for the Op4 mode. I'll leave it going for a while...

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU





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