Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1002; Body=2 Fuz1=2 Fuz2=2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on lipkowski.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL, HTML_MESSAGE,RATWARE_GECKO_BUILD autolearn=no version=3.1.3 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by paranoid.lipkowski.org (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id t4QGqUTS016893 for ; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:52:30 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1YxI3C-00043x-Fq for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:49:58 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1YxI3C-00043o-2P for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:49:58 +0100 Received: from mout0.freenet.de ([195.4.92.90]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YxI39-0001tR-Ly for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 26 May 2015 17:49:56 +0100 Received: from [195.4.92.141] (helo=mjail1.freenet.de) by mout0.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxI38-00030Q-99; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:49:54 +0200 Received: from localhost ([::1]:44527 helo=mjail1.freenet.de) by mjail1.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxI38-0004MJ-4m; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:49:54 +0200 Received: from mx10.freenet.de ([195.4.92.20]:40854) by mjail1.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxI0f-0008A7-2N; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:47:21 +0200 Received: from xd9bf6b6b.dyn.telefonica.de ([217.191.107.107]:2232 helo=[192.168.178.21]) by mx10.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID dl4yhf@freenet.de) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.82 #2) id 1YxI0e-00035i-Ca; Tue, 26 May 2015 18:47:20 +0200 Message-ID: <5564A395.3040102@freenet.de> Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 18:47:17 +0200 From: wolf_dl4yhf 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 CC: rsgb_lf_group@yahoogroups.co.uk 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> <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> In-Reply-To: X-Originated-At: 217.191.107.107!2232 X-Scan-Signature: b183672d2d39521dd5e5027c4d070614 Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010306020008050402050009" 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-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.56 on 10.1.3.10 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3291 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010306020008050402050009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Ok, I will leave the two instances running. Just got a first decode from WSPR-15 from DF1VB in the neighbourhood: 2015-05-26 16:16 VK3TCT 0.475677 -8 0 QF15bt +43 19.953 VK3ELV QF33bq 433 269 2015-05-26 16:15 DF1VB 0.475808 -2 -3 JO31sk +20 0.100 DL4YHF JO42fd 101 63 2015-05-26 16:15 DF1VB 0.475810 +4 -3 JO31sk +20 0.100 DF1VB/15 JO31sk 0 0 2015-05-26 16:12 F6CNI/M 0.475630 -18 0 JN19qb +0 0.001 F5WK JN18hp 72 45 Sorting the LF/MF spots by frequency seemed to cause a heavy load on the wsprnet.org server ... the response arrived minutes later. Cheers, Wolf . Am 26.05.2015 18:31, schrieb Andy Talbot: > I'll be putting my WSPR-15 transmission on later. > Probably starting around 2100(z) > > Andy G4JNT > > On 26 May 2015 at 17:24, wolf_dl4yhf > wrote: > > 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 >> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM >> *To:* 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 > > --------------010306020008050402050009 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Ok, I will leave the two instances running.
Just got a first decode from WSPR-15 from DF1VB in the neighbourhood:


2015-05-26 16:16   VK3TCT   0.475677   -8   0   QF15bt   +43   19.953   VK3ELV   QF33bq   433   269 
 2015-05-26 16:15   DF1VB   0.475808   -2   -3   JO31sk   +20   0.100   DL4YHF   JO42fd   101   63 
 2015-05-26 16:15   DF1VB   0.475810   +4   -3   JO31sk   +20   0.100   DF1VB/15   JO31sk   0   0 
 2015-05-26 16:12   F6CNI/M   0.475630   -18   0   JN19qb   +0   0.001   F5WK   JN18hp   72   45 

Sorting the LF/MF spots by frequency seemed to cause a heavy load on the wsprnet.org server ... the response arrived minutes later.

Cheers,
  Wolf .



Am 26.05.2015 18:31, schrieb Andy Talbot:
I'll be putting my WSPR-15 transmission on later.  
Probably starting around 2100(z)

Andy  G4JNT

On 26 May 2015 at 17:24, wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de> wrote:
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
Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2015 1:16 AM
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



--------------010306020008050402050009--