Yes---it's too bad that the proposed WWVB changes don't increase the
number of transitions at all.  Could they not do the
low-modulation-index DCF77-like signal on top of the BPSK?  That is,
put some small, fast phase wiggles on top of the slow 180-degree
transitions (or 120-degree transitions if NIST can be convinced to
change to that)?
  The problem is that if you superimpose a wider bandwidth modulation over
the narrow one you have distributed the available sideband power over the
broader bandwidth. You have less power transmitted over the narrow bandwidth
than before. This reduces the range of the station for narrow and wide bandwidth users. I changed the batteries in our cheap clock here at home and it took several days for it to finally get a signal strong enough to set the time. The signals are weak for many everyday users since their clocks have relative small antennas and they have lots of local interference from compact florescent bulbs and switching power supplies
in computers and TV sets.

Bill wa4lav

time-nuts mailing list --
To unsubscribe, go to
and follow the instructions there.

Reply via email to