Return-Path: Received: from rly-db09.mx.aol.com (rly-db09.mail.aol.com [172.19.130.84]) by air-db10.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.6) with ESMTP id MAILINDB101-ae84989f55f59; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:07:04 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-db09.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDB096-ae84989f55f59; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 15:06:56 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LUo1O-0002oJ-RS for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:06:54 +0000 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LUo1O-0002o9-EA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:06:54 +0000 Received: from cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be ([134.58.240.43]) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LUo1L-0002Os-BZ for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:06:53 +0000 Received: from smtps02.kuleuven.be (smtpshost02.kulnet.kuleuven.be [134.58.240.75]) by cavuit01.kulnet.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2AEB7B8046 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtps02.kuleuven.be (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtps02.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A6E6F3863 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from webmail2.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (webmail2.cc.kuleuven.ac.be [134.58.242.4]) by smtps02.kuleuven.be (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F91FF3862 for ; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 (CET) Received: by webmail2.cc.kuleuven.ac.be (Postfix, from userid 65534) id 4D51155AC; Wed, 4 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 (CET) Received: from 215.107-136-217.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be (215.107-136-217.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be [217.136.107.215]) by webmail4.kuleuven.be (Horde MIME library) with HTTP; Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 Message-ID: <20090204210541.8ffa7o4y8ukgocg4@webmail4.kuleuven.be> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:05:41 +0100 X-Kuleuven: This mail passed the K.U.Leuven mailcluster From: Rik Strobbe To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <01eb01c9832c$74945e50$a402a8c0@Inspiron><20090131111012.i80joik1ztc0wggk@webmail4.kuleuven.be><000f01c983b5$cfe04330$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <20090131200626.39efb3dc@lurcher> <071798B2D2F8408E9570FC11F569524C@AGB> In-Reply-To: <071798B2D2F8408E9570FC11F569524C@AGB> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H3 (4.1.2) X-Originating-IP: 217.136.107.215 X-KULeuven-Information: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven X-KULeuven-Scanned: Found to be clean X-KULeuven-Envelope-From: rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.be X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: strong WSPR signals Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; DelSp="Yes"; format="flowed" 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 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Dear all, I am a bit fuzzed by the SNR values given by WSPR, in particular with strong signals. SM6BHZ is right now loud and clear, CW could be easy to copy and Gus could even give SSB a try. But WSPR is giving SNR values between -7 and +4 dB. What I noticed is that the SM6BZH signal raises the "noise level" given by WSJT7 by about 6dB (-3dB in absense of the signal, +3dB otherwise). I noticed the same effect with M0BMU some days ago. Maybe that causes the poor SNR? 73, Rik ON7YD - OR7T Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm