Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> Received: from rly-mf01.mx.aol.com (rly-mf01.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.171]) by air-mf03.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMF033-93f4973983132e; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 15:59:59 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mf01.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMF015-93f4973983132e; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 15:59:33 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LOejk-0008Gx-Nw for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:59:16 +0000 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LOejk-0008Go-5c for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:59:16 +0000 Received: from [193.252.22.191] (helo=smtp6.freeserve.com) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>) id 1LOejj-0001ov-1K for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:59:16 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3611.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 96675700008D for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:59:05 +0100 (CET) Received: from AGB (unknown [91.109.49.115]) by mwinf3611.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 5DFC9700008C for <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>; Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:59:05 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20090118205905385.5DFC9700008C@mwinf3611.me.freeserve.com Message-ID: <49D8904E268646CCA3D1F69178CA6E9E@AGB> From: "Graham" <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk> To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> References: <E707ADCA612746D0863345865C2EA00C@JimPC> <3A121E9CEE544EDE99C1246EB03982ED@Black> <3F978A4D79D441478CC0178248C48968@JimPC> In-Reply-To: <3F978A4D79D441478CC0178248C48968@JimPC> Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 20:59:04 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8050.1202 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8050.1202 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR SNR 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=0.1 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-IP: 193.82.116.20 Jim, The thing to check for is the number of sync locks it has , ... gives a good idea of the path usability. G .. -------------------------------------------------- From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com> Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 8:44 PM To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org> Subject: LF: Re: WSPR SNR > Dear LF Group, > > Still watching G4WGT's WSPR signal here - it is interesting to see how it > copes well with the QSB. Compare the last few decodes: > > 2006 -30 1.2 0.503599 0 G4WGT IO83 37 > 2014 -22 1.1 0.503599 0 G4WGT IO83 37 > 2018 -22 1.0 0.503599 0 G4WGT IO83 37 > 2024 -27 1.3 0.503599 0 G4WGT IO83 37 > 2030 -24 1.2 0.503599 0 G4WGT IO83 37 > > with the WSPR spectrogram attached (it looks similar in Spectrum Lab), and > you can see that although in a significant fraction of each transmission > period the signal has faded to invisibility, decoding has still been > successful. > > It is also interesting to see in the WSPRnet database that GM4SLV is > reporting SNR that is consistently several dB better than here at M0BMU, > although he is nearly 3 times as far from G4WGT. > > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.9/1900 - Release Date: 1/18/2009 > 12:11 >