From: DK7FC <73dk7fc@googlemail.com>
Message-ID: <54D7EF70.70900@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2015 00:21:20 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <ca41dbe9b82c4625904e9c5f5498b63b@kabelmail.de> <54D77171.6000107@gmail.com> <54D7E234.8080004@gmail.com> <59BE4EF9AA5A441481B7F111843F3B47@White>
In-Reply-To: <59BE4EF9AA5A441481B7F111843F3B47@White>
Subject: Re: LF: WSPR MF please
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------040004010509070603010403"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040004010509070603010403
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Markus,

Am 08.02.2015 23:41, schrieb Markus Vester:
> Stefan,
> so it looks like your two receivers provide some spatial diversity, 
> simultaneously listening to both may be useful to overcome fading 
> nulls during QSOs. On the other hand, the advantage of a lower noise 
> location may become much more pronounced in daylight. So you'll have 
> benefits both night and day ;-)
> 73, Markus (DF6NM)
>

Yes but i've started the experiment in daylight and there is not so much 
difference. In this test the remote RX + USB soundcard was connected to 
my netbook, it was not (yet) a vorbis stream. I still have some internet 
connectivity problems which i will solve the next week. Then there will 
be an experiment using the remote vorbis stream. BTW there is a second 
WLAN hotspot from a university building which is 1 km closer than my own 
AP and it is in the same direction. I can install both hotspots. This 
may rise the availability of the stream (strong rain, snow...).
I will then run a grabber window, showing 2 spectrograms (home and 
remote) focusing to the WSPR or CW section side by side. Then we will 
see the QSB between both locations :-)

73, Stefan

--------------040004010509070603010403
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
 http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi Markus, <br>
<br>
Am 08.02.2015 23:41, schrieb Markus Vester:
<blockquote cite="mid:59BE4EF9AA5A441481B7F111843F3B47@White"
 type="cite">
  <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
 http-equiv="Content-Type">
  <meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.23588">
  <div><font face="Arial" size="2">Stefan,</font></div>
  <div> </div>
  <div><font face="Arial" size="2">so it looks like your two
receivers provide some spatial diversity, simultaneously listening to
both may be useful to overcome fading nulls during QSOs. On the other
hand,</font><font face="Arial" size="2"> the advantage of a lower noise
location may become much more pronounced in daylight. So you'll have
benefits both night and day ;-) </font></div>
  <div> </div>
  <div><font face="Arial" size="2">73, Markus (DF6NM)</font><br>
  </div>
  <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
Yes but i've started the experiment in daylight and there is not so
much difference. In this test the remote RX + USB soundcard was
connected to my netbook, it was not (yet) a vorbis stream. I still have
some internet connectivity problems which i will solve the next week.
Then there will be an experiment using the remote vorbis stream. BTW
there is a second WLAN hotspot from a university building which is 1 km
closer than my own AP and it is in the same direction. I can install
both hotspots. This may rise the availability of the stream (strong
rain, snow...). <br>
I will then run a grabber window, showing 2 spectrograms (home and
remote) focusing to the WSPR or CW section side by side. Then we will
see the QSB between both locations :-)<br>
<br>
73, Stefan<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------040004010509070603010403--