Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-mp04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id B058E3800009C; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:55:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tkl4S-0008Mq-Lj for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:30:08 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tkl4R-0008Mh-PL for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:30:07 +0000 Received: from mta01.eastlink.ca ([24.224.136.30]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1Tkl4M-0007XY-GO for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:30:06 +0000 Received: from cmgw05.eastlink.ca ([24.222.39.112]) by mta01.eastlink.ca (Oracle Communications Messaging Exchange Server 7u4-21.01 64bit (built Feb 16 2011)) with ESMTP id <0MF600K46HYRLDP0@mta01.eastlink.ca> for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:29:41 -0400 (AST) Received: from JimPC ([24.222.221.76]) by cmgw05.eastlink.ca with id coVg1k0021fWQeo01oVh26; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 20:29:41 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=NdK+TB/4 c=1 sm=1 a=xXU8UyEAOJCIx2MCRwCL3Q==:17 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=F3M5lZpKAAAA:8 a=xBE2oqKEwNB_q4PmpeAA:9 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=wk6s2zzMB60A:10 a=xXU8UyEAOJCIx2MCRwCL3Q==:117 Message-id: <083E427EEDD945E09E49186B9A46C36B@JimPC> From: Jim and Hannelore Fisher To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <50CE5A96.40902@broadpark.no> <50CE6BDB.6080008@gmx.net> <50CF71CE.5090902@broadpark.no> <50CFA0F5.1030506@princeton.edu> In-reply-to: <50CFA0F5.1030506@princeton.edu> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:29:44 +0000 MIME-version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6002.18197 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6002.18463 X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: happy to test it here Jim VE1JF ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Taylor" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:47 PM Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 @ 474 +1400 [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [24.224.136.30 listed in list.dnswl.org] X-Scan-Signature: 64437c466041e93ffedda7fb96b22b71 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 @ 474 +1400 Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=iso-8859-1; reply-type=response 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=0.1 required=5.0 tests=MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1dc14850cfbee64ae1 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none happy to test it here Jim VE1JF ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Taylor" To: Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 10:47 PM Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 @ 474 +1400 > Hi Laurence, Steinar, and all, > > On 12/17/2012 5:15 PM, Laurence KL1 X wrote: >> Steinar I was getting some reasonable syncs but appeared not >> stable enough - so that confirms it :-) Laurence KL 1 X > > LA5VNA wrote: >>> Thanks Tobias. The conclusion is clear , my system in NOT stable enough >>> when using JT9-10. Pity , but that's life ;( > > Please send me an example of a JT9-10 file that seems like it should > have decoded, but did not. NOBODY has yet done so. I am reasonably > sure that small amounts of frequency drift can be detected and > adequately compensated in software... but I can't do it without some > typical examples. > > If you know it, it will help to have, along with the file, the message > that was being transmitted. > > Note to all: I am presently working on a version or WSPR that will allow > transmissions of length 10 (or 15?) and 30 minutes, with other features > like the traditional WSPR. Sensitivity should be as good as the WSPR-8 > and WSPR-32 tests made by Marcus (and others). > > -- 73, Joe, K!JT > >