| |
EB2DVY > PSK31 05.07.99 23:01l 757 Lines 26642 Bytes #-9976 (0) @ WW
BID : 107-EB2DVY
Read: OE1RRB GUEST
Subj: PSK31 Digest V1 #88
Path: OE1XAB<OE3XPR<OM0PBM<OM0PBB<OK0PJI<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<DB0RGB<DB0ABH<DB0AAB<
DB0ZKA<DB0KFB<DB0SIP<OE9XPI<HB9EAS<HB9OS<HB9PD<HB9IAP<F6BIG<F1BBI<
F5KPO<F5KAT<EA3D<ED3ZAD<EA2URV
Sent: 990625/2129Z @:EA2URV.EABI.ESP.EU #:58151 [URV-ABRA Bilbao] $:107-EB2DVY
From: EB2DVY@EA2URV.EABI.ESP.EU
To : PSK31@WW.SYD.NSW.AUS.OC
De: Psk31 Digest <owner-psk31@aintel.bi.ehu.es>
Para: <psk31-digest@aintel.bi.ehu.es>
Asunto: Psk31 Digest V1 #88
Fecha: viernes 25 de junio de 1999 4:23
Psk31 Digest Friday, June 25 1999 Volume 01 : Number 088
In this issue:
Re: [psk31] MixW Comments
Re: [psk31] Video Requirements for MixW32
[psk31] MixW Comments (Macro Problems)
Re: [psk31] PSK31 Download URLS in one place
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
[psk31] PSK31 Comments
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Re: [psk31] MixW Comments (Macro Problems)
[psk31] MixW32
[psk31] Field Day
Re: [psk31] MixW32
[psk31] MIX32 Opinions
Re: [psk31] MixW32
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
[psk31] Multipath Effects on PSK31 Signals
Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Re: [psk31] Multipath Effects on PSK31 Signals
See the end of the digest for information about psk31-digest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:19:46 -0400
From: "Doug Alspaugh (K3DUG)" <alspaugh@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MixW Comments
Chas,
The registered version has beam headings. There is also a waterfall tune
scope in the registered version. Plus for those that need it the registered
version runs in 640 by 480. Check out this URL to download a 640 by 480
demo.
http://users.nais.com/~jaffejim/mixwpage.htm
73 Doug K3DUG
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Greene <cgreene@loa.com>
To: Jeff & Pat Steinkamp <steinkam@azstarnet.com>; PSK List
<psk31@bipt106.bi.ehu.es>
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 8:23 PM
Subject: Re: [psk31] MixW Comments
> At 10:49 AM 6/23/99 -0700, Jeff & Pat Steinkamp wrote:
> >Downloaded this demo the other day.Contrary to my first impression, this
is
> >going to be a very good program with the mixture of PSK and RTTY, type
ahead
> >buffers and the other goodies for rig control, log file, beam headings
and
> >the such.
> ---snip---
> My first reaction was disappointment but as I got to learn what MixW does
> I am satisfied with it. Contrary to the PSKSBW and PSKGNR, it does most
> of the thing in way similar to the way other digital programs do. Xpwin
and
> PakWin are two, for example. What is missing in the first two are a log,
beam
> headings, transceiver interface, and of course, the multiple modes of
RTTY,
> (and in the future CW ?). The problem as I see it, is the difficulty in
1)
> the sparse
> documentation, and 2) the great differences in operator interface. Some
things
> I initially wished the program would do, I found out that it actually did,
> after Nick
> answered some questions I sent him. It is reasonably stable (hasn't
crashed
> or frozen up Windows yet), but it is missing some of the final modes. I
> haven't
> registered it yet, but I probably will after field day. It doles one
thing
> I had been
> looking for, RTTY using the sound card. I have RITTY, but it doesn't work
> in this
> computer as it doesn't have a "real" Sound Blaster card. I can see the
> advantages
> to the "scope" type display, but I use Spectrogram with my RTTY converter,
> and with
> the waterfall display in Spectrogram it is easier to tune RTTY than in
> MixW32Demo.
> One thing I miss from PSKSBW is the audio squelch, but you get used to
garbage
> printing out if you use a typical RTTY converter.
>
> So PSK31 is bound to be included in numerous digital programs, like Pactor
> was when
> it first came out. Some modes, like Pactor II remain proprietary, but
> Peter did not
> chouse to go this route. Now Pactor II is not commonly used. The future
> of PSW31
> is to be determined, but first indications are that it will be a bright
one.
> ____________
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 21:10:26 -0700
From: "Jeff & Pat Steinkamp" <steinkam@azstarnet.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Video Requirements for MixW32
- -----Original Message-----
From: Robert Lay <w9dmk@crosslink.net>
To: hasan schiers <schiers@netins.net>; PSK Mailing List
<psk31@bipt106.bi.ehu.es>
Date: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [psk31] Video Requirements for MixW32
>Dear Hasan,
>
>
>Relative to MixW32:
>
>
>The topmost text area (heaven only knows what that is called) should be a
pale
>blue.
....snip
Actually this is the area the contains the data being saved in the log file.
Alt-P allows you to set your partners data, Call name qth etc. Once that is
set, click the button that has the clock display and it will copy all this
info to the log edit window (the one just below the type ahead buffer). You
an edit this info if needed. When your read to log the contact, click the
save button on the bottom left of the window and the info in the log edit
window is transferred to the blue window and saved to the log file called
log.log.
>
>73 de Bob Lay, W9DMK, King George, VA
>http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
>http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/albania/784
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 22:58:14 -0700
From: Bill Brannick <WmLB@prefer.net>
Subject: [psk31] MixW Comments (Macro Problems)
I downloaded the program this afternoon and used it exclusively this
evening for my PSK QSOs.
Comments ( or questions)
1. My old eyes do not like that non-boldened Courier font against that pale
yellow background. I suppose there is no way to change that situation.. for
now.
2. I did figure out the way to create macros by using the CTRL/F key and
typing the wording into the resultant window..
3. I also created a couple of brag.txt files but have had NO success in
invoking those..
Example: I created a Brag7.txt file and saved it in the Mix directory. I
then went into the program and pressed Ctrl/F7 and entered <BRAG7> into
the window.. Later when transmitting into a dummy load I hit F7... Got
nothing...
So what am I doing wrong.?
=====
Alternate Email Addr: W6WLB@arrl.net
ICQ No. 8393042
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 18:40:12 +0000
From: Peter Martinez <Peter.Martinez@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] PSK31 Download URLS in one place
From Peter Martinez G3PLX
Marty K2HTO refers to "the PSK31 Home Page of Peter G3PLX".
Just to set the record straight, I do not have a home page. The most
excellent page and the associated ftp software download facilities
available from the <http://aintel.bi.ehu.es/psk31.html> page is
neither provided nor owned by me but provided and owned by Eduardo
EA2BAJ, to whom I give my thanks.
73
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 06:02:21 +0000
From: Peter Martinez <Peter.Martinez@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
From Peter Martinez G3PLX
The remarks by Valentin about UT2UZ's MIX32 program are most
offensive and destructive.
UT2UZ (Nick) is primarily trying to contribute to the PSK31 scene. As
I said in my last message (before seeing Valentin's remarks), we need
more people to give their contributions to this field. If the
attitude of people like Valentin is the attitude of the majority,
then there will be very few amateurs who will want to risk it.
Speaking for myself, I know that the adverse criticism of my own
attempts has been a major factor in my decision to let other
programmers carry the project forward and take a back seat myself.
Had I received comments like Valentin's about my software, I would
have pulled out completely. I just hope that Nick has a stronger
consitution that me.
Don't let the fact that Nick is hoping to make a little pocket money
from his program colour the issue: Valentin is criticising a software
package that he has not paid for, and if he doesn't like it then he
doesn't need to buy it. Whether it's free software or a demo package,
if you really want to help the few brave programmers who are trying
to make the PSK31 world a better place, then pass your comments,
bug-reports and suggestions back privately to the programmer in a
constructive way. If you don't want to contribute to the art then
keep quiet, but remember that if you bite the hand that feeds you,
you might not get nicer food. You might just starve!
73
Peter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:46:36 +0200
From: "Paulus" <paulstra@xs4all.nl>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Peter,
I agree completely !.
Thanks for putting things in such an clear way.
Cheerio now,
73 de Paul, PAOOCD
paulstra@xs4all.nl
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:40:39 +0200
From: Valentin <valonso@tid.es>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Peter Martinez wrote:
> >From Peter Martinez G3PLX
>
> The remarks by Valentin about UT2UZ's MIX32 program are most
> offensive and destructive.
I am sorry and appologyze if with my bad englhis I offend to some one, wasn´t
my intention.
I build myself my own antenas, my own electronics and help to others for
free, like old times,
and I eat twice a day then... no starving at all.
If a sotfware is bad, demo or not, is bad, may be that be say more soft but
the true doesn´t need
defenders.
73 de Valentin EA4CBH.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 05:19:10 -0500
From: "Jim Sheldon" <w0eb@kscable.com>
Subject: [psk31] PSK31 Comments
I agree 100 percent with Peter Martinez' comments on the flap over
MixW32. If you don't like it you don't have to pay for it. But just
remember, according to the laws of thermodynamics, "There is no
such thing as a free lunch!" If you must criticize, keep it constructive
and send it directly to the program's author, not to all on the reflector.
Jim Sheldon, W0EB, Wichita, Kansas, USA
Keep Phasing -- PSK-31
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 05:31:47 -0500
From: "Gil Baron W0MN" <gbaron@home.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
> From Peter Martinez G3PLX
>
> The remarks by Valentin about UT2UZ's MIX32 program are most
> offensive and destructive.
>
> UT2UZ (Nick) is primarily trying to contribute to the PSK31 scene. As
If the comments were snide and nasty I can agree with you. If the comments
were criticism of the program and valid review of the program then I can't
see any problem. If you put it out there AND wish to charge for it then you
are wide open for evaluation. If you can't accept that then it is no loss,
you probably would not do good support anyhow.
Again, I have not tried the program and have no opinion on it myself. I do
think that if the demo does not give full function then it is nearly useless
for evaluation. If it is not working properly then warning others is not an
unfair thing to do, IF done as a review, not as criticizing the motives of
the programmer.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 06:19:51 -0400
From: "Doug Alspaugh (K3DUG)" <alspaugh@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MixW Comments (Macro Problems)
Bill,
The registered version does allow you to use bold text. Helps a lot.
I don't see from your description what you are doing wrong with the brag
files. I have them set up here and they work well. Make sure the Macro is
bracketed with the greater than and less than symbols and all in upper case.
Doesn't appear that the case of the file is important. I have mine all lower
case.
73 Doug K3DUG
http://www.k3dug.com/sstv/
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Brannick <WmLB@prefer.net>
To: <PSK Mail List (2) :;>
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 1:58 AM
Subject: [psk31] MixW Comments (Macro Problems)
> I downloaded the program this afternoon and used it exclusively this
> evening for my PSK QSOs.
>
> Comments ( or questions)
>
> 1. My old eyes do not like that non-boldened Courier font against that
pale
> yellow background. I suppose there is no way to change that situation..
for
> now.
>
> 2. I did figure out the way to create macros by using the CTRL/F key and
> typing the wording into the resultant window..
>
> 3. I also created a couple of brag.txt files but have had NO success in
> invoking those..
>
> Example: I created a Brag7.txt file and saved it in the Mix directory. I
> then went into the program and pressed Ctrl/F7 and entered <BRAG7> into
> the window.. Later when transmitting into a dummy load I hit F7... Got
> nothing...
>
> So what am I doing wrong.?
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 06:07:49 -0500
From: John Chamberlain <chamber@cord.org>
Subject: [psk31] MixW32
Has anybody, I mean, ANYBODY actually bought the MixW32 program yet? All I
keep seeing here is folk bemoaning the shortcomings of the demo program.
Has anything been fixed in the commercial version, or is this program dead
on arrival?
73 de AC5CV
John Chamberlain (AC5CV@arrl.org)
Waco, TX EM11jm
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 08:37:17 EDT
From: Jkn1olo@aol.com
Subject: [psk31] Field Day
Just a reminder to all you PSK31 users that there will be may individuals and
clubs using psk31 as a digital mode for field day. Please get out there and
help us rack up some points!
Thanks and have fun this weekend.
John
N1OLO
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 09:23:35 -0400
From: "Doug Alspaugh (K3DUG)" <alspaugh@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MixW32
Hi John,
I received my registered copy yesterday and have just come from 20 mtrs
where I QSO'd with AE0Q.
The registered version has more features than the demo. I don't know why
they don't brag about them in the demo text file. The instructions with the
registered version could still use improvement, but some of the most
complained about things are in the registered version. 640 x 480 screen size
and waterfall tuning to mention a couple.
73 Doug K3DUG
http://www.k3dug.com/sstv/
- ----- Original Message -----
From: John Chamberlain <chamber@cord.org>
To: PSK List <psk31@bipt106.bi.ehu.es>
Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 7:07 AM
Subject: [psk31] MixW32
> Has anybody, I mean, ANYBODY actually bought the MixW32 program yet? All
I
> keep seeing here is folk bemoaning the shortcomings of the demo program.
> Has anything been fixed in the commercial version, or is this program dead
> on arrival?
>
>
> 73 de AC5CV
> John Chamberlain (AC5CV@arrl.org)
> Waco, TX EM11jm
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 08:58:51 -0600
From: Loren E Page <w7bwi@juno.com>
Subject: [psk31] MIX32 Opinions
Valentin has a right to express what he finds in regard to programs. I
appreciate his remarks. We can learn from what other folks say on the
reflector.
Any programmer "worth his salt" won't "throw in the towel" because he
receives some negative remarks. There are many who think MIX32 is great.
I like Peter's program, not just because it is free, but because it tells
me a lot more about the other person's signal than I am able to glean
from MIX32. Also there is the squelch which keeps my screen from filling
with garbage with weak signals. The type face is easier for my old eyes
to read. These are some of the reasons's I like Peter's program with Al's
"front end". I'd prefer the two were joined in a way that I would not be
in Peter's screen when I wanted to be in Al's and instead of sending "His
Call de My Call", I find I've changed to QPSK.
Ford Motor Company has never quit building cars just because I prefer GM
products and have expounded on why I don't care for Fords!
73, Loren W7BWI
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 11:57:49 -0500
From: "Grins" <Grins@interconnect.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MixW32
I have it on order, John... comments to follow after getting and using it.
Mike Kelly, K5AWI
- -----Original Message-----
From: John Chamberlain <chamber@cord.org>
To: PSK List <psk31@aintel.bi.ehu.es>
Date: Thursday, June 24, 1999 12:14 PM
Subject: [psk31] MixW32
>Has anybody, I mean, ANYBODY actually bought the MixW32 program yet? All I
>keep seeing here is folk bemoaning the shortcomings of the demo program.
>Has anything been fixed in the commercial version, or is this program dead
>on arrival?
>
>
>73 de AC5CV
>John Chamberlain (AC5CV@arrl.org)
>Waco, TX EM11jm
>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 12:38:14 -0500
From: "Gilbert Baron" <xzs1947@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Estoy de acuerdo contigo, hablas toda la verdad.
No importa el ingles, el pensamiento es lo que vale.
Gil Baron gbaron@usa.net
"Bailar es vivir"
"Hierro candente, batir de repente"
- ----- Original Message -----
From: Valentin <valonso@tid.es>
To: Peter Martinez <Peter.Martinez@btinternet.com>
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 15:36:00 -0400
From: "Robert Lay" <w9dmk@crosslink.net>
Subject: [psk31] Multipath Effects on PSK31 Signals
This report describes a simple experiment in which the Multipath Effects on
PSK31
Signals were simulated using an aoustical path.
The motivation for this test was the experience in actual QSO's with
amateurs using an acoustical path from the sound card to the transmitter audio
input consisting of a speaker on the sound card and the standard microphone used
with the transmitter. It was my experience in such QSO's that an otherwise
strong and normal looking signal in the waterfall would often produce a very
poor (50%)
print, and that the phase scope would often go red or the yellow lines would at
best be "all over the place".
First, let me say that I recognize that an acoustically coupled path is quite
different from the radio propagation path. However, I think we can draw some
interesting
conclusions about the radio propagation path anomalies from experiments with an
acoustical path - more on that in my conclusions.
The first tests consisted of a non-acoustical phase delay scheme for introducing
phase distortion electronically. That did not work at all and was quickly
abandoned.
I then set up two speakers and a microphone in a triangle of 1 meter on a side.
The two speakers were driven from computer "TX" from the two channels, left and
right, of the sound card speaker output jack. The microphone was connected to
the microphone input jack on Computer "RX".
Both computers are running PSK31SBW ver 1.06, and Computer "TX" was sending a
lengthy test file.
The objective was to find orientations and spacings of the acoustical elements
that would produce multipath effects.
Procedures:
1) My initial assumption was that I would be able to see marked interference
from two speakers each pointing at the same microphone. I found that I was
unable to get significant distortion as would be indicated by either a text
garble or a non-standard phase scope rendition. All combinations of minor
variations in direction of speakers and spacing were pretty much ignored by the
software. These tests were performed with a range of signal levels from just
discernable up to about 1/2 max amplitude on the phase scope. In all cases the
print stayed at near 100%..
2) I then killed one of the two speaker channels (by swinging the mixer control
fully to one side) and began experimenting with only one speaker. I soon noted
that I could cause noticeable garble and distortion of the phase scope when the
speaker was pointed towards a hard surface (wood, metal, glass, etc) so that the
signals arriving at the microphone were arriving with a difference in the path
length of around 80 - 90 cm. At this point I referred to my references for a
check on the wavelength of sound traveling in air and found that a 1 kHz sound
wave has a wavelength of about 33 cm. With that value in mind, I chose to place
a hard surface reflector exactly 8.25 cm behind the microphone on the side
opposite the speaker. The presumption being
that if the longer path to the microphone (via the reflecting surface) were 1/2
wavelength longer (to and fro over a 1/4 wavelength), then there
might be an opportunity for complete cancellation of the signal at the
microphone. Various experiments along that vein were attempted - all without
success. I could force some degradation of the phase scope signal, but copy
remained excellent and the phase scope never went red.
3) My third approach was to separate the speaker and microphone by a bit more
than 2
meters and simply walk around in the vicinity of the mid point but about 1 to 3
feet off-axis. The results were remarkable. I could cause the phase scope to go
red (indicating that the decoding had unlocked) with just a few inches of
motion of my body while the signal strength stayed right up at 25 to 50% of the
scope radius. This reminded me strongly of the early days of FM radio when
people quickly found discovered that in the 100 MHz band their bodies became
walking
dipoles. The point where I could most easily cause the signal to unlock was
actually with my body closer to the microphone than at the mid range point. That
is, I moved further from the speaker to about the same distance as the
microphone but staying about 14 inches or about 36 cm from the microphone so
that the sound reflected from my body would travel an additional 36 cm in
comparison to the sound arriving at the microphone from the direct path. Note
that 36 cm is approximately 1 wavelength. I then carried a large sheet of hard
surfaced material in front of my body in the hope of improving the reflectivity
and providing a more definable reflecting surface. That worked as well.
I want to make it quite clear that in order to get the signal to go red in the
phase scope and unlock, the amplitude of the secondary path signal had to be
quite high. I got the best reaction by orienting the microphone so that it
pointed towards the reflecting surface rather than towards the source. I also
found that the reflecting surface has to be at least a wavelength in size. A
small reflector (of say 6" in diameter) made an ineffecive reflector.
Conclusions:
a) My rationale for why procedure (2) above did not generate the exptected
results, whereas (3) above did quite well, is that I had forgotten that a
reflector would not be effective unless it was big enough to be a very efficient
reflector - that is, aound 1 wavelength minimum.
b) I am satisfied that multipath effects need only one secondary
path to be completely disruptive. The key seems to be that both the amplitude
and the
phase of the secondary path signal must be just right to produce destructive
interference.
c) The analogy between the HF propagation path and an acoustical path is quite
simple. The 1000Hz tone in any medium of propagation has a period of 1
millisecond (otherwise it would not be 1000Hz - Hi!). The modulation envelope on
the HF carrier, therefore, takes 1 millisecond to travel one wavelength.
Electromagnic radiation, (at any of the HF frequencies, for example) travels
approximately 300,000 meters in one millisecond. (Speed of light is 300 000 000
meters/second). Therefore, in order to suffer an analogous multipath
interference in radio propagation, the secondary path must be approximately 186
miles further (or shorter) than the primary path. However, I understand that a
path that involves a reflection from an ionospheric layer can have a 180 degree
phase reversal of the modulation envelope just due to the nature of the
reflection process. If that is correct, then the two paths could cause
destructive interference even without any difference in path length, so long as
the amplitudes are comparable. I do not have any specifics on aurora, but it is
my understanding that the multiple paths over polar regions can be radically
different in length, which I suppose would account for the distinctive and
destructive interference effects.
d) If you are planning to use an acoustical path and want to avoid the
electrical connection of the sound card signal from the sound card to the
transmitter (to reduce hum or ground loops), and you want to use a
speaker/microphone path to implement that acoustical path, I recommend that you
fasten the speaker and microphone together with a rubber band or other means of
binding them together and place about 1" to 2" of polyurethane foam material
(not styrofoam) between the two and another blanket of the same material around
the assembly in order to eliminate extraneous noise, and multipath effects.
I have tried this method and it works quite well. The phase scope on the
received signal looks just as good as for an electrical path.
73 de Bob Lay, W9DMK, King George, VA
http://www.qsl.net/w9dmk
http://www.fortunecity.com/meltingpot/albania/784
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 17:04:38 -0500
From: "Gil Baron W0MN" <gbaron@home.com>
Subject: Re: [psk31] MIX32 Frist Opinion
Estoy de acuerdo contigo, hablas toda la verdad.
No importa el ingles, el pensamiento es lo que vale.
@FWDPSK31
Gil Baron gbaron@usa.net
"Bailar es vivir"
"Hierro candente, batir de repente"
- ----- Original Message -----
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 19:58:33 -0500
From: "George T. Baker" <w5yr@swbell.net>
Subject: Re: [psk31] Multipath Effects on PSK31 Signals
Just a brief note, Bob:
An acoustical path from the receiver speaker or headphones to the
soundcard input seems to work equally well as the one you described. I
have frequently obtained perfect copy over such a path using the built-in
microphone on my laptop. Normal waterfall and phase scope displays as
well.
All this suggests that an entirely acoustic two-way link could be used in
difficult cases of ground-loop induced problems, etc., or in temporary ad
hoc PSK31 setups, such as demonstrations, emergency work, etc.
Excellent note and good lab work. Thanks for undertaking the experiment
and for sharing your results. Is the next step to evaluate FSK31 in the
same manner?
72/73, George AMA 98452 R/C since 1964
Amateur Radio W5YR, in the 53rd year and it just keeps getting better!
AutoPOWER Systems, Fairview, TX (30 mi NE Dallas) Collin County
QRP-L QRP-ARCI FISTS NORCAL ZOMBIE ARS 10-X 33.2 N 96.6 W EM13RE
Robert Lay wrote:
>
> This report describes a simple experiment in which the Multipath Effects on
> PSK31
> Signals were simulated using an aoustical path.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
to unsuscribe from the list send to majordomo@aintel.bi.ehu.es a message
with a text line as follow: unsubscribe psk31 or unsubscribe psk31-digest
More instructions on PSK31 Webpage: http://aintel.bi.ehu.es/psk31.html
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
------------------------------
End of Psk31 Digest V1 #88
**************************
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
