Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: Auto-EbNaut reception on LF in JN80

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: Auto-EbNaut reception on LF in JN80
From: DK7FC <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 13:49:46 +0200
In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]om> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
Hi all,

I'm sorry for the many emails today. But i have another idea for Domenico:

You could run a 3rd 'channel', e.g. 137.485 kHz (still oriented on the current frequency section) and indicate/define this channel (3) as a 'local' channel, whereas the other channels are indicated as 'medium' (2) and 'DX' (1).
The difference in the settings in these channels (apart from the frequency of course) is the list size!
Local stations or strong stations like me will decode almost every time at rank 0, so you can use a very small list length for that channel, e.g. 50.
A weak/distant station or in times of high QRN one (e.g. VO1NA) would prefer to use one of the other channels, just in case that the rank will be much worse.
You can see that most of the 'false' decodes happen at list lengths of > 5000. So with the use of different list lengths you can avoid several false decodes, CPU usage and false entries in the log file.
For the 'medium' channel you could use a list length of 1000 and for DX maybe 20000.

Just an idea :-)

Using two frequencies has already improved the situation:

-----------------------------------------
2017-07-05_09:59:30   start time + 30 s  on 137.490 kHz 
found rank 0 ber 8.0645e-02 Eb/N0 10.6 M -9.849675903e+02 [GM ALL IW4DXW K] ps [  1  180  180  180  180]
2017-07-05_10:59:30   start time + 30 s  on 137.495 kHz 
found rank 0 ber 2.3185e-01 Eb/N0 4.9 M -5.360782471e+02 [73 FROM DL TO I] ps [  0    0    0    0    0]
--------------------------------------------------------
In a few minutes i will try to run less antenna current to come closer to the limit :-)

Thanks for the great service :-)

73, Stefan
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>