Message-ID: <20090131154747.j0qs9zqpeplw0osk@webmail4.kuleuven.be>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 15:47:47 +0100
From: Rik Strobbe <Rik.Strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be>
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <fc7eccec0901310525o48daf8e1hb54471dff670aff5@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <fc7eccec0901310525o48daf8e1hb54471dff670aff5@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.2)
Subject: Re: LF: QRP WSPR beacon
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=ISO-8859-1;
	DelSp="Yes";
	format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Andy,

no copy here at the moment (14:45 UT).
I will leave the RX monitoring for the next hours while working in the garden.
Look at wsprnet for eventual spots from me.

73, Rik  ON7YD - OR7T

Quoting Andy Talbot <andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com>:

> I have a QRP WSPR Beacon going on the usual 503870Hz frequency.     RF power
> is 100mW which gives an an estimated ERP of -6dBm - needless to say the
> reported power in the message is therefore wrong.
>
> Its operating at 100% duty cycle at the moment while the band is quiet - if
> anyone has probs, just give a shout here and I'll drop the rate.
>
> The WSPRnet database is showing Jim's copy of it at -29dB S/N, which
> compares well with the transmission an hour earlier when I made some antenna
> tuning tweaks and confirmed max power from the broadband PA as 140 Watts.
> Jim's report on that was +2dB S/N.   31dB higher and within 0.5dB of
> expected.
>
> Andy  G4JNT
> www.g4jnt.com
>



Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm