Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Impressive\s+demonstration\s+of\s+one\s+dB\s+of\s+signal\s+strength\s+improvement\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: donovanf@starpower.net
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 11:15:32 -0400 (EDT)
These recordings are an impressive demonstration of the benefit of one dB of signal strength improvement in a weak signal situation. Click on the links on this website: www.ab7e.com/weak_signal/mdd.h
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00134.html (8,374 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 16:26:17 -0400
I have never had the opportunity before to hear differences in signal strength by 1 db increments. +1 db is clearly an advantage and a +2 db difference nearly obliterates the weaker signal. Remarkabl
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00136.html (9,427 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: "Bernie McClenny, W3UR" <bernie@dailydx.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 18:11:45 -0400
For me, and I suspect for many other Topband ops, when QRN/QRM is involved slower is better than faster! 18-20 WPM is about the right speed. Bernie McClenny, W3UR Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019)
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00137.html (11,439 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Shohet, KQ2M" <kq2m@kq2m.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2019 19:58:01 -0400
Thats Interesting Bernie. For me it is dependent on how well I can hear them. If they are strong enough for me to hear them reasonably well, then when I am dealing with heavy qrn with brief short bur
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00138.html (13,069 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: "Bernie McClenny, W3UR" <bernie@dailydx.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 07:49:58 -0400
Just to be clear - when there are very weak signals and QRM/QRN. Bernie McClenny, W3UR Editor of: The Daily DX (1997-2019) The Weekly DX (2001-2019) How's DX? (1999-2019) Two week trial - http://www.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00139.html (14,797 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: "rjairam@gmail.com" <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:27:16 -0400
I always thought speed was dependent on the length of fades and type of burst noise. Faster would attempt to catch short fades whereas slower would catch longer fades but weak S/N? On topband my stra
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00141.html (13,568 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 15:55:25 -0600
Regardless of speed, it always seems the fade/QRN is synchronized with the callsign and you miss the same letters each time  :-) Barry W2UP Faster would attempt to catch short fades whereas slower wo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00148.html (14,040 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Impressive demonstration of one dB of signal strength improvement (score: 1)
Author: john@kk9a.com
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2019 10:35:52 -0500
Isn't that the truth! Of course unnecessary information such as /qrp is always perfect copy. John KK9A Regardless of speed, it always seems the fade/QRN is synchronized with the callsign and you miss
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2019-08/msg00152.html (8,544 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu