Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real?

To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real?
From: "Graham" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 00:04:56 +0100
Importance: Normal
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
"Well  that's  a  TWO BIT  description if ever  there  was one :-)

Some one has been at the wobbly  bob again

And we had just one coincidental detection all night , despite there being 14 active monitors' , strangely from 18:55 to 22:55 , there are no false dynamic detections showing on my local copy , now what are the odds of that happening , may be
page 70  will  reveal  all  ?

Next it be that no one can win the lottery as the odds are over 40^6 :1
Mines a Pint or 568.261485 millilitres  if we  want  to  be  exact
now  dose that  include  the  head or  not ? is nothing  exact :(

G,)



--------------------------------------------------
From: "wolf_dl4yhf" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 9:40 PM
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LF: MF 630m: False Decode or Real?

Hi Jochen,

I think the discussion about Opera's own 'deep search' mode (or whatever the proper name is) was done here (or on "the other" reflector) over a year ago, and the main problem I see is that the 'real time web-based exchange' of currently active stations means fooling oneself. Consider this: You know there are only four possible callsigns which have been transmitting, so in reality the software only has to decide for a TWO BIT number. Much easier than "really" decoding the entire number of message bits in an Opera message.
In my very personal point of view, this 'real time web exchange of
stations (calls) which are currently transmitting' should not be used at
all.
For comparison, Markus' (DF6NM's) own deep search uses a quite large table
which is *static*, which means that his decoder has no chance to play
unfair (because it doesn't know who's currently active or not), and it
also doesn't know what others receive (over the internet). What I don't
know is how many stations are currently in that list, and thus how many
bits the algorithm effectively has to "decode" (well, it doesn't really
decode, it also makes a best guess from a limited number of list entries
to chose from).
All the additional data which look as if they were "decoded" (eg "VK3ELV
... 140w + Top loaded L 18m vert 80m horz") have been taken from a
database (***including the callsign***), not radio .. the only real
information is the '- 37 dB' report, and the two question marks which
imho may as well have been ten or twenty (considering the season and the
distance).
Well just my two pence of wisdom. I don't use Opera and don't think I ever
will.
Cheers,
  Wolf .










Am 20.05.2015 22:03, schrieb J. Althoff:
Hi Wolf,

You are not disappointing me at all. I put this issue under discussion myself.
Please share your opinion about this to this topic to us in detail. Maybe
I missed
A discussion about this before, but I am very interested in arguments
about this
Topic.

Thanks, Jochen


    -= DF1VB =-
   -= KH2MM =-
  Jochen Althoff
  [email protected]
+491712020206


Am 20.05.2015 um 21:44 schrieb wolf_dl4yhf <[email protected]>:

Sorry to dissapoint you but .. no, no, no, and again, no.

73,
  Wolf

Am 20.05.2015 20:02, schrieb Jochen Althoff:
Just popped up at my RX:

17:52 477 VK3ELV de DF1VB/3 Op8 Deep Search ?? 16348 km -37 dB in Dortmund with 140w + Top loaded L 18m vert 80m horz
Any comments welcome

73, Jochen






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