Message-ID: <007301c9642e$451977e0$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920>
From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <000701c962f1$b79b04c0$4201a8c0@home> <016901c963c8$1c543720$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <494EE0A8.5040607@telus.net> <004501c963cf$24a20db0$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <000901c96356$9dffe3e0$4201a8c0@home> <002701c96426$21023f20$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:10:12 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: 500kHz WSPR Beacon
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Jay
You are correct in your observations. WSPR is not a productive mode. Using 
CW and variations thereof would achieve better results in a lot less time 
and effort, and overall  is not suited to the majority of 500 Khz operators, 
with limited power, that does not overcome fading of signals.
The most suitable mode is medium  speed CW where the information can be 
received on peaks before fading sets in. An exchange of information(QSO) can 
take place in real time very quickly. QRS at between 1 - 3 sec dots also 
works at times with slow fades but takes longer.
An automated mode error correction like amtor would probably work but even 
this could be very slow with repetive repeats and dropping out eventually, 
excessive bandwidth could be another problem in a 3 khz slot.
For amateur radio purposes with restricted low power the most suitable mode 
for 500 khz is CW.
In the past I have experimented with practicall every mode availabe on 
various amateur and commercial bands.
Radio amateurs only need to exchange a minimum of information like report 
and do not need an elaborate complicated digital system, whereas commercial 
systems have to shift large volumes of information and need to be automated, 
this requires high power, antenna diversity arrays all of which overcomes or 
minimises fading and poor propagation.
In the radio amateur context keep it simple and it is unlikely that anything 
new will be invented that is better than what has gone before.
The average radio amateur has limited resources and research facilities and 
barely enough room to install the appropriate antenna for the job, on MF and 
LF.
73 Jay and good dxing
mal/G3KEV


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <jrusgrove@comcast.net>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 11:12 AM
Subject: LF: Re: Re: 500kHz WSPR Beacon


> Jim
>
>>Although the band allocations  do not align between UK and US, I think it 
>>should be possible to
>>operate
>> split-frequency to produce a bi-directional trans-atlantic WSPR beacon 
>> network. Anyone
>> interested?
>
>
> I'm interested...but the success rate EU > US has been somewhat 
> disappointing so far. For all of the
> transmitting time so far I have copied only three lines successfully. 
> Nonetheless I'd be interested
> in trying. Before setting things up for a QSO perhaps we should try the US 
>  > EU part of the link to
> see how reception is on your end. I'll need some help picking a clear 
> frequency. First preference
> would be 508.5 kHz (507.0 kHz dial) although any frequency between 508.0 
> and 510.0 kHz would be
> available.
>
> Please advise. Let me know early enough in the day and I can have it on 
> the air that
> evening...weather permitting, of course. Moderate to sever icing 
> conditions necessitate lowering of
> the vertical/tophat.
>
> Jay W1VD  WD2XNS  WE2XGR/2
>
> p.s. Suggest we start listing frequencies as above to eliminate any 
> confusion...or just list as
> '507.0 kHz dial' and forget the actual transmitted frequency...
>
>
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.19/1859 - Release Date: 12/20/2008 
2:34 PM