Return-Path: Received: from rly-md07.mx.aol.com (rly-md07.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.145]) by air-md05.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMD051-911497f332f6a; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:16:00 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-md07.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMD071-911497f332f6a; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:15:45 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LRqaz-0006N5-8B for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:15:25 +0000 Received: from [193.82.59.130] (helo=relay2.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LRqay-0006Mw-LK for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:15:24 +0000 Received: from smtp-out-4.talktalk.net ([62.24.128.234] helo=smtp.talktalk.net) by relay2.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LRqav-0000gT-Lp for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:15:24 +0000 X-Path: TTSMTP X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvIEAFzBfklOlG6B/2dsb2JhbACCQTCBa4QugjgGiRSHIK9ShUyCdg Received: from unknown (HELO mal769a60aa920) ([78.148.110.129]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP; 27 Jan 2009 16:15:15 +0000 Message-ID: <004f01c9809a$708b5c30$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> From: "mal hamilton" To: "rsgb" Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 16:15:15 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,AWL=-0.518,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS=1.166 Subject: LF: PROPAGATION WSPR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004C_01C9809A.704615D0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-AOL-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C9809A.704615D0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On LF I do not think wspr is the correct mode to study propagation as sugge= sted by some. Two procedures are required with the mode. First it has to be=20= detected then analyised and decoded into a print format to be viewed. Morse=20= sent in the QRS mode at a suitable speed between 1 and 120 sec dot only requ= ires one procedure, to be detected and viewed and would give a good indicati= on of propagation whether used for QSO purposed or otherwise. I have pointed out recently that I have observed all of the traces from thos= e transmitting WSPR and had the carrier been directly keyed in QRS mode an I= D or intellegence would have been conveyed, whereas only part of the time wa= s the signals decoded in wspr. For those viewing the print format only and g= etting no copy would never know whether the signall was being received or if= it was faulty sampling and decoding.=20 Cut out the second procedure of decoding, avoid ambiguity and use the slow k= eyed carried method using morse code or murray code. A waterfall display and= the EYE is a very sensitive detector,=20 For those experimenting with data modes have fun but todate in the amateur r= adio LF/MF context nothing yet has surpassed the use of slow morse keyed at=20= a speed to suit one's needs ie propagation studies or communication between=20= two stations. mal/g3kev =20 ------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C9809A.704615D0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On LF  I do not think wspr is the= correct=20 mode to study propagation as suggested by some. Two procedures are= =20 required with the mode. First it has to be detected then analyised and decod= ed=20 into a print format to be viewed. Morse sent in the QRS mode at a suitable s= peed=20 between 1 and 120 sec dot only requires one procedure, to be detected and vi= ewed=20 and would give a good indication of propagation whether used for QSO purpose= d or=20 otherwise.
 
I have pointed out recently that I have obs= erved=20 all of the traces from those transmitting WSPR and had the carrier been dire= ctly=20 keyed in QRS mode an ID or intellegence would have been conveyed, whereas on= ly=20 part of the time was the signals decoded in wspr. For those viewing the prin= t=20 format only and getting no copy would never know whether the signall was bei= ng=20 received or if it was faulty sampling and decoding.
 
Cut out the second procedure of decoding, a= void=20 ambiguity and use the slow keyed carried method using morse code or mur= ray=20 code. A waterfall display and the EYE is a very sensitive detector,=20
For those experimenting with data mode= s have=20 fun but todate in the amateur radio LF/MF context nothing yet has=20 surpassed the use of slow morse keyed at a speed to suit one's needs ie= =20 propagation studies or communication between two stations.
mal/g3kev
 
------=_NextPart_000_004C_01C9809A.704615D0--