Return-Path: Received: from rly-da02.mx.aol.com (rly-da02.mail.aol.com [172.19.129.76]) by air-da08.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDA082-a58497eda3e215; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 04:56:36 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-da02.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDA028-a58497eda3e215; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 04:56:26 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LRkdl-0006ms-2D for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:53:53 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LRkdk-0006mj-M8 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:53:52 +0000 Received: from smtp-out-4.talktalk.net ([62.24.128.234] helo=smtp.talktalk.net) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LRkdc-0005q0-AR for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:53:52 +0000 X-Path: TTSMTP X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsQEANNnfklOlvNJ/2dsb2JhbACEW8U0hFV2 Received: from unknown (HELO mal769a60aa920) ([78.150.243.73]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP; 27 Jan 2009 09:53:24 +0000 Message-ID: <009801c98065$18787710$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <20090126225342.5af9e594@lurcher> <459DB6156FCD43509AAB5F5D7282462C@AGB> <20090126232813.551c6bfc@lurcher> <497ECDA6.2060105@telia.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:53:24 -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-Karma: unknown: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: G0NBD difficult to decode Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 Johan I have mentioned this several times before but noone seems to know why strong signals or any visible signals do not DECODE. I get some decodes therefore I know my system is working but not sure whether the problem is at the TX or RX end. To me wspr seems unreliable given the strength of signals but producing only marginal decoded output. 73 de mal/gkev ----- Original Message ----- From: "Johan H. Bodin" To: Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 9:02 AM Subject: Re: LF: G0NBD difficult to decode >I too saw a quite strong signal last night which didn't decode. It was >around > 503.97 kHz and almost as strong as M0BMU, who was perfectly audible most > of the > time. There was no "banana effect" on the waterfall so it was stable > enough. I'd > guess problem is caused by a soundcard sampling frequency error. > > 73 > Johan SM6LKM > > ---- > > John P-G wrote: >> I see others reporting inconsistent decodes of you on the chat page at >> WSPRnet, so it's not just me. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.14/1917 - Release Date: 1/26/2009 6:37 PM