Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25])
by mtain-dk04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 3BE2B380000E6;
Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:39:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
id 1TBn91-00061Q-6n
for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:38:19 +0100
Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net)
by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
id 1TBn90-000614-JW
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:38:18 +0100
Received: from smtpout3.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.59] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk)
by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77)
(envelope-from <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>)
id 1TBn8x-0000VU-Pp
for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:38:17 +0100
Received: from AGB ([2.26.22.87])
by mwinf5d45 with ME
id yDeE1j00F1skBk203DeEG3; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:38:15 +0200
Message-ID: <4D7B333C9708457CB6165B71D11AFFF8@AGB>
From: "Graham" <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <505082C4.9040702@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <8A3A36B33B7A4837B46D102AAD328609@AGB> <002f01cd90eb$0279bf60$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
In-Reply-To: <002f01cd90eb$0279bf60$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:38:14 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
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: There is something fishy about ROSS ? From: mal hamilton Sent:
Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:32 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Subject:
Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band [...]
Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no
trust
[80.12.242.59 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
X-Scan-Signature: 48f9f369e416634ea68e1d2c7f17cd5d
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0073_01CD90F4.3DD06560"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE,
HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY,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: 3039ac1db4085050907c1831
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_0073_01CD90F4.3DD06560
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There is something fishy about ROSS ?=20
From: mal hamilton=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:32 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Circus is a good description
How many more variations do we need with so few operators to go around.
Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, another on WSPR, another on =
Slow WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on BPSK another on =
ROSS and so it goes on=20
Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs currently on LF es MF it =
works out at 0.37543 of a Clown for each mode.
John Duffy's CIRCUS can do better than that with at least ONE CLOWN per =
ACT
g3kev
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Graham=20
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Well yes Joe ( K) is right, BPSK is better , but needs a =
linear system to transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he could =
extract another 6 dB if the modulation system was changed =
......but that's no longer Op-ook a fsk return to zero, as in some =
modes is not bpsk ,=20
As Jim's published design shows its possible to add a modulator =
to a class e amp , by envelope restoration ,=20
WLOF is already coded and makes use of multi pass to gain s/n =
, but is psk and needs a liner system ...and is not a one-pass =
decode system , when the s/n is low .but at -41 dB , by what ever =
scale , OP32 is well into the noise in single pass ?
Which is back to where we started .....
But as Laurence's 'Pesky Protons' go and play somewhere else , =
then we all have a ring side seat for Stefan's 'Flying Circus' =
at least over this winter !
G..
=20
From: Stefan Sch=E4fer=20
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org ; Edgar J Twining=20
Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Message from Joe/K1JT.
BTW i don't know if it is OK for Joe that his email is forwarded to =
everyone in the web! But i think it would be OK for him to forward it to =
a limited number of active radio amateurs operating in the 137 kHz band. =
So if you make this email public in the web, it is your decision!
73, Stefan/DK7FC
-------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower =
WSPR for the 137 khz band=20
Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400=20
Von: Joe Taylor <joe@Princeton.EDU>=20
An: Stefan Sch=E4fer <Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de>=20
Hi Stefan,
Thanks for your interesting message.
A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20
possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20
necessary code. You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20
for several months, however. Perhaps near the end of this year.
One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20
possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK =
a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR. Do you=20
agree?
-- 73, Joe, K1JT
------=_NextPart_000_0073_01CD90F4.3DD06560
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="ISO-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3Dtext/html;charset=3Diso-8859-15 =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META name=3DGENERATOR content=3D"MSHTML 8.00.6001.19298">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: =
15px"=20
id=3DMailContainerBody leftMargin=3D0 topMargin=3D0 bgColor=3D#ffffff =
text=3D#000000=20
CanvasTabStop=3D"true" name=3D"Compose message area">
<DIV>There is something fishy about =20
ROSS ? </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style=3D"font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A =
title=3Dg3kevmal@talktalk.net=20
href=3D"mailto:g3kevmal@talktalk.net">mal hamilton</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 12, 2012 2:32 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=3Drsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20
href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the =
137 khz=20
band</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Circus is a good description</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>How many more variations do we need with so few =
operators=20
to go around.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, =
another on=20
WSPR, another on Slow WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on =
BPSK=20
another on ROSS and so it goes on </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs =
currently on=20
LF es MF it works out at 0.37543 of a Clown for each =
mode.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>John Duffy's CIRCUS can do better than that with =
at least=20
ONE CLOWN per ACT</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial>g3kev</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; =
PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"=20
dir=3Dltr>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dg8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk=20
href=3D"mailto:g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk">Graham</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Drsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20
=
href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 12, =
2012 1:08=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas =
for a=20
slower WSPR for the 137 khz band</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Well yes Joe ( K) is right, =
BPSK =20
is better , but needs a linear system =
to =20
transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he =
could =20
extract another 6 dB if the =
modulation =20
system was changed ......but that's no =
longer =20
Op-ook a fsk return to zero, as in some modes =
is not bpsk , </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As Jim's published design shows its =
possible=20
to add a modulator to a class e amp , =
by =20
envelope restoration , </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>WLOF is already coded and makes use =
of =20
multi pass to gain s/n , but is psk =
and =20
needs a liner system ...and is not a =
one-pass =20
decode system , when the s/n is low .but =
at -41 dB , by what ever scale , OP32 is well =20
into the noise in single pass ?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Which is back to where we started =
.....</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>But as Laurence's 'Pesky Protons' =
go and=20
play somewhere else , then we all have =
a =20
ring side seat for Stefan's 'Flying =
Circus' at=20
least over this winter !</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>G..</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV style=3D"BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style=3D"font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A=20
title=3D"mailto:Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de CTRL + Click =
to follow link"=20
href=3D"mailto:Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de">Stefan =
Sch=E4fer</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A=20
title=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org CTRL + Click to =
follow link"=20
=
href=3D"mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=
</A> ;=20
<A=20
title=3D"mailto:edgarjtwining@virginbroadband.com.au CTRL + Click =
to follow link"=20
href=3D"mailto:edgarjtwining@virginbroadband.com.au">Edgar J =
Twining</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 =
khz=20
band</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Message from Joe/K1JT.<BR><BR>BTW i don't know if it is =
OK for=20
Joe that his email is forwarded to everyone in the web! But i think it =
would=20
be OK for him to forward it to a limited number of active radio =
amateurs=20
operating in the 137 kHz band. So if you make this email public in the =
web, it=20
is your decision!<BR><BR>73, Stefan/DK7FC<BR><BR>-------- =
Original-Nachricht=20
--------=20
<TABLE class=3Dmoz-email-headers-table border=3D0 cellSpacing=3D0 =
cellPadding=3D0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TH vAlign=3Dbaseline noWrap align=3Dright>Betreff: </TH>
<TD>Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TH vAlign=3Dbaseline noWrap align=3Dright>Datum: </TH>
<TD>Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400</TD></TR>
<TR>
<TH vAlign=3Dbaseline noWrap align=3Dright>Von: </TH>
<TD>Joe Taylor <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E=20
=
href=3D"mailto:joe@Princeton.EDU>"><joe@Princeton.EDU></A></TD></TR=
>
<TR>
<TH vAlign=3Dbaseline noWrap align=3Dright>An: </TH>
<TD>Stefan Sch=E4fer <A class=3Dmoz-txt-link-rfc2396E=20
=
href=3D"mailto:Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de"><Stefan.Schaefer=
@iup.uni-heidelberg.de></A></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE><BR><BR><PRE>Hi =
Stefan,
Thanks for your interesting message.
A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20
possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20
necessary code. You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20
for several months, however. Perhaps near the end of this year.
One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20
possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK =
a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR. Do you=20
agree?
-- 73, Joe, K1JT
</PRE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_0073_01CD90F4.3DD06560--