Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: LF: Re: wsjtx

from [Joe Taylor] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Re: wsjtx
From: Joe Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 11:19:21 -0400
In-reply-to: <006501cdb516$5d1a3900$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
References: <000a01cdb507$101bd370$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <003101cdb50d$a59685c0$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <[email protected]> <006501cdb516$5d1a3900$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 

Hi Mal and all,

G3KEV wrote:

The signals were good on the waterfall with me. I did not save any of the
data since I was just experimenting.
of course the problem could have been at the TX end.
OK. The problem could also be at the Rx end, or it could be a fault in the decoder. If you save the data, we can find out which. Otherwise, we will be no wiser. 


I have never needed to try to decode signals at the levels of strength
claimed(very weak) because I have large antennas and signals are always
strong from those that indicate that they are active on LF/MF.
JT9 is a weak signal mode. Of course, any of us who always receive strong signals are better off making QSOs with a general-purpose mode such as good-old-CW. 

        -- 73, Joe, K1JT
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: LF: no decodes, help needed, Markus Vester
Next by Date:  Re: LF: no decodes, help needed, Markus Vester
Previous by Thread:  Re: LF: Re: wsjtx, mal hamilton
Next by Thread:  LF: jt9 on 500KHz, g3zjo
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]