Yeah... something like that. Notice that is -108 CINR, not RSSI, like the numbers we're all used to.
On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: > I think Patrick said to add 30 dB to Telrad signal numbers because they > were “per subcarrier” or something? > > *From:* Colin Stanners <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Saturday, June 13, 2015 4:17 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here? > > Patrick, I haven't been following Telrad but that's too incredible - I > can't see how -108, which is below the noise floor for any reasonable > channel bandwidth (20mhz+?) could get any reasonable speed, much less > those. > > On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Patrick Leary <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Should I resist sharing this sort of thing? If it's out of line, let me >> know Chuck. >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On >> Behalf Of Steve Discher >> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:51 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [Telrad] Another Telrad success story >> >> >> >> Not to flood the list with these but Zirkel is having great results. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ************************************************************************************ >> >> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer >> viruses. >> >> >> ************************************************************************************ >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ************************************************************************************ >> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by >> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & >> computer viruses. >> >> ************************************************************************************ >> >> >
