[pskmail] Re: RSID sensitivity
- From: sancudo <sancudobravo@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: pskmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:32:27 -0600
Has anyone looked at MT63 or Olivia for weak signal comparisons?
Mario
WO5O
On 1/29/10, Pär Crusefalk <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> This is just excellent.
> As RSID is MFSK-like it should follow that MFSK32 should be the best and
> your data seems to verify that. OTOH THOR22 was a disappointment.
> It would be excellent to redo this test and add more modes, that way we
> would have some real data instead of claimed SNR figures. For now I
> think its safe to mark the MFSK-modes as suitable for QRP and weak
> signal situations in the mode table.
>
> 73 de Per, sm0rwo
>
>
> ons 2010-01-27 klockan 16:48 +0100 skrev Rein Couperus:
>> I performed some tests to see how sensitive the RSID decoder is when
>> connecting in a slow mode.
>> method: wait until SM0RWO switches back to PSK500R reduce power and
>> connect in the test mode,
>> repeat until it does not work anymore... The test path is 1500 km
>> North-South, frequency 10147 kHz,
>> channel clear. Here are this afternoon's results: PSK125R: 1 Watt to
>> connect, RSID switching at 500 mW
>> (block incomplete at 500 mW) MFSK32: 500 mW to connect... RSID switched at
>> 200 mW,
>> (block incomplete at 200 mW) THOR22: 2 Watts to connect (RSID switched
>> at 300 mW, block incomplete at 300 mW).
>> This test was around 15:00 UTC, already getting dark in Stockholm...
>> The server timing needs to be tweaked for the slow modes (MFSK16, THOR8),
>> timing is too short at the moment.
>> Also, a connect request in THOR8 takes so long the chance is big the
>> server switches back to PSK500R
>> during the packet... Generally, to me it looks like the sensitivity is
>> plenty, also for QRP work.
>> 73, Rein PA0R --
>> http://pa0r.blogspirit.com
>>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
