Message-ID: <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 18:24:34 +0200
From: wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <5561CEB5.3060506@charter.net>, <5561ECC1.8030301@kpnmail.nl> <556222D3.11110.8F3A44@roelof.ndb.demon.nl> <55623C9A.4060107@charter.net> <000e01d096dd$ac91f5d0$6401a8c0@JAYDELL> <556311FA.7090205@posteo.de> <55636912.1010105@no3m.net> <55636E96.3040506@posteo.de> <55638C47.1090402@freenet.de> <5563AD3E.2090204@posteo.de> <AAB2E5D3738D4446917E34CF2F988B72@White>
In-Reply-To: <AAB2E5D3738D4446917E34CF2F988B72@White>
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------030001050100060207060606"
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.
--------------030001050100060207060606
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the info.

I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same 
directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for -15. 
Not a single decode from the latter yet.

I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear (:o)

73,
   Wolf DL4YHF .


Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:
> Wolf, as far as I know the only way to separate them in the database 
> seems to be sorting by frequency (which is not very useful otherwise). 
> There is a peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the 
> database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and hh:46) at 
> midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries).
> Stefan, I'm not sure about not using -15 on MF. Even though fading is 
> faster and deeper, the WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After 
> all WSPR-2 is useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The 
> spectrogram of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two 
> deep fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been argued 
> that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized by -2 and not 
> by -15, and maybe there's not all of the theoretical 9 dB gain, but I 
> reckon on average it's not much less.
> Laurence yes your frequencies are correct, dial 475.2 kHz, RF: 475.6 - 
> 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 - 475.825 WSPR-15.
> I wonder if it is possible to run two instances of WSPRX side by side 
> on the same machine, one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash 
> one another?
> 73, Markus
>
> *From:* DK7FC <mailto:selberdenken@posteo.de>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
> *To:* rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org <mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
> *Subject:* Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A
>
> Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
>> p.s. is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes 
>> from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ?
>
> ...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m 
> days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band. 
> These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely there 
> is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that successful 
> detections are even less likely in that mode over the pond.
>
> 73, Stefan


--------------030001050100060207060606
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">rrr Stefan and Markus - thanks for the
      info.<br>
      <br>
      I have two instances of WSPR-X running, launched from the same
      directory, one configured (manually) for WSPR-2 and the other for
      -15. Not a single decode from the latter yet.<br>
      <br>
      I guess as long as they run, the two instances don't interfear
      (:o)<br>
      <br>
      73,<br>
        Wolf DL4YHF .<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      Am 26.05.2015 02:19, schrieb Markus Vester:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote cite="mid:AAB2E5D3738D4446917E34CF2F988B72@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">Wolf, as far as I know the only
          way to separate them in the database seems to be sorting by
          frequency (which is not very useful otherwise). There is a
          peculiarity in that the hh:15 and hh:45 timestamps in the
          database seem to be "rectified" to even minutes (hh:16 and
          hh:46) at midnight UT (just happened to G4JNT entries). </font></div>
      <div> </div>
      <div><font face="Arial" size="2">Stefan, I'm not sure about not
          using -15 on MF. Even though fading is faster and deeper, the
          WSPR decoder seems to cope well with it. After all WSPR-2 is
          useful on HF where fading happens in seconds. The spectrogram
          of Andy's transmission last night sometimes showed two deep
          fades in one sequence, but it was decoded ok. It has been
          argued that a very short and strong maximum might be utilized
          by -2 and not by -15, and maybe there's not all of the
          theoretical 9 dB gain, but I reckon on average it's not much
          less.</font></div>
      <div> </div>
      <div><font face="Arial" size="2">Laurence yes your frequencies are
          correct, dial 475.2 kHz, RF: 475.6 - 475.8 WSPR-2, 475.8 -
          475.825 WSPR-15.</font></div>
      <div> </div>
      <font face="Arial" size="2">
        <div><font face="Arial" size="2">I wonder if it is possible to
            run two instances of WSPRX side by side on the same machine,
            one for -2 and one for -15? Or would they crash one another?</font></div>
        <div> </div>
      </font>
      <div><font face="Arial" size="2">73, Markus</font></div>
      <div> </div>
      <div> </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div> </div>
      <div style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
        <div style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
          <div style="font-color: black"><b>From:</b> <a
              moz-do-not-send="true" title="selberdenken@posteo.de"
              href="mailto:selberdenken@posteo.de">DK7FC</a> </div>
          <div><b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM</div>
          <div><b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              title="rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org"
              href="mailto:rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org">rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org</a>
          </div>
          <div><b>Subject:</b> Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A</div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      Am 25.05.2015 22:55, schrieb wolf_dl4yhf:
      <blockquote cite="mid:55638C47.1090402@freenet.de" type="cite">p.s.
        is there a possibility to filter / display only WSPR-15 decodes
        from the database, and how widespread is the use of that mode ?<br>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      ...there have been a few MF TA tests in WSPR-15 in the early 630m
      days, showing that this mode is to slow for the path on that band.
      These tests have not been very extended though. But most likely
      there is not a 'gain' of 9 dB over WSPR-2. I would assume that
      successful detections are even less likely in that mode over the
      pond.<br>
      <br>
      73, Stefan<br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------030001050100060207060606--