Message-ID: <5564BDB8.7010205@freenet.de>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 20:38:48 +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: <55649E42.3070906@freenet.de> <8D265EC08008761-1BC8-16D9E@webmail-vm124.sysops.aol.com> <5564A94F.3060101@gmx.com>
In-Reply-To: <5564A94F.3060101@gmx.com>
Subject: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Status: O

Hi Jochen,

Strange ... I decoded only one out of three your WSPR-15 transmissions.
The signal is strong on the waterfall (even on the WSPR-2 w'f) but a 
slight slant (frequency drift).

Anyway, I will leave everything running / online just in case anyone 
else likes to try.

p.s. letting two instances of WSPR-X running simultaneously, and (by 
human operator error) letting both of them transmit, produces a horrible 
sound in the transmitter  ... this happened during my own WSPR-15 
transmission around 18:12 or 18:14 (when the WSPR-2 instance decided to 
transmit also - ouch !).

73,
   Wolf DL4YHF


Am 26.05.2015 19:11, schrieb Jochen Althoff:
> Hi Markus,
>
> yes it was caused by my GPS-RX which crashed somehow. After a reboot 
> it's okay again and controling my sequence again properly.
>
> 73, Jochen df1vb
>
> Am 26.05.2015 um 18:56 schrieb Markus Vester:
>> Hi Wolf,
>> that's exactly what I did too, with same results: wspr-2 running and
>> uploading fine, no chance to test -15 due to lack of signals. But if
>> signals had been present on both bands, wouldn't both instances try to
>> access the same files in the same directory, eg. ALL_WSPR.TXT or
>> settings? Well, with Andy on -15 we may find out tonight.
>> All the best,
>> Markus (DF6NM)
>> BTW I decoded DF1VB for a while with 6.5 seconds latency, and then no
>> more - might have been a too large clock offset.
>>
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Mitteilung-----
>> Von: wolf_dl4yhf <dl4yhf@freenet.de>
>> An: rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
>> Verschickt: Di, 26 Mai 2015 6:27 pm
>> Betreff: Re: LF: 630M WSPR T/A - WSPR-15?
>>
>> 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 *474.2 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
>>
>