[Lowfer] WD2XNS in WOLF mode

[Dexter McIntyre W4DEX]

I'll place my bet on WOLF by a long shot.  Yes WOLF isn't as easy to get 
running but it's more rewarding to get a decode.  WOLF doesn't require 
the transmit and receive end to be synchronized by a common time 
source.  Also I think when WOLF does show a decode repeated over and 
over gives more confidence about the accuracy of the information being 
received.

Dex


Douglas D. Williams wrote:
> WOLF VS WSPR-15 in a direct weak signal receive test would certainly be
> interesting. Not knowing much of anything about WOLF, it is quite obvious
> to me that WSPR-15 is easier to get set up and running. All one needs is a
> decent stability receiver, and an internet connection to set the computer
> clock with a time standard. Actually, an internet connection isn't even
> required if you have a $15 Wal-Mart "atomic clock" with a seconds display.
>
> For successful WOLF operation, it seems the computer sound card needs to be
> calibrated with a known frequency source.
>
> So, if I understand correctly, WSPR's weak signal detection ability depends
> very much on both the transmitting station and the receiving station having
> a highly accurate timebase. This is easily achieved these days.
>
> WOLF's weak signal detection ability is dependant on.....I know not what,
> but I'm guessing extreme frequency accuracy/stability, like QRSS, only more.
>
>