Return-Path: X-Spam-DCC: paranoid 1481; Body=3 Fuz1=3 Fuz2=3 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,SPF_PASS 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 u899NHSP025597 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:23:18 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1biHwL-0004Ly-WB for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:17:41 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1biHwJ-0004Lp-VA for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:17:39 +0100 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1biHwC-0006Cg-Dt for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 10:17:38 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1C71120A73 for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:17:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 3sVs6c6QyMzytr for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:17:27 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <57D27E26.5070003@posteo.de> Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 11:17:26 +0200 From: DK7FC 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: In-Reply-To: X-Scan-Signature: 92b6515a4252c45136e975e6745a1e0d Subject: Re: LF: How is possible? Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020109070702070306030103" 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 10.1.3.11 Status: O X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 8711 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020109070702070306030103 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I think it has to do with different software versions!? imestamp Call MHz SNR Drift Grid Pwr Reporter RGrid km az 2016-09-03 09:04 F/DK7FC 0.475681 +38 0 JN29od 1 F6CNI JN19qb 134 267 I'm still using WSPR-X v0.0 r3058 here. Newer versions performed worse for some reasons. This version does not produce SNRs better than +15 dB if i remember correctly. Another thing may be that someone could use e.g. a 250 Hz wide filter instead of the reference filter bandwidth of 2500 Hz (SSB), which then produces wrong ("improved") reports. 73, Stefan Am 09.09.2016 10:13, schrieb Max IK0VVE: > Could someone explain this? > > 2016-09-08 19:42 IK0VVE 0.475682 > * +17* 0 JN61km 0.05 F6CNI JN19qb 1119 322 > 2016-09-08 > 19:26 IK0VVE 0.475682 +1 0 JN61km 0.05 F6CNI JN19qb 1119 322 > 2016-09-08 > 19:10 IK0VVE 0.475682 -1 0 JN61km 0.05 F6CNI JN19qb 1119 322 > 2016-09-08 > 18:54 IK0VVE 0.475682 -6 0 JN61km 0.05 F6CNI JN19qb 1119 322 > > If I listen my signal with my RX antenna 5 meters far from TX antenna > my SNR is maximum +13 db, also for IZ0GIF that is about 4 km far from me. > Probably Andy has an exceptional receiving system but +17 to more than > 1000 km is a great SNR I thing, HI. > > After some minute great reports again: > > 2016-09-08 19:46 DH5RAE 0.475755 +14 1 JN68qv 0.5 > F6CNI JN19qb 730 275 > 2016-09-08 19:46 PA3ABK/2 0.475740 +19 0 JO21it 0.5 > F6CNI JN19qb 320 198 > > > 73, Max IK0VVE > > > > ______________________________ > > /...here some of my HAM Radio projects.../ > */SkyGeM Rotator/* > */AntennaDinamica/* > */RCR-DX/* > / > / > /www.ik0vve.net/ --------------020109070702070306030103 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I think it has to do with different software versions!?

imestamp Call MHz SNR Drift Grid Pwr Reporter RGrid km az
 2016-09-03 09:04   F/DK7FC   0.475681   +38   0   JN29od   1   F6CNI   JN19qb   134   267 

I'm still using WSPR-X v0.0 r3058 here. Newer versions performed worse for some reasons. This version does not produce SNRs better than +15 dB if i remember correctly.

Another thing may be that someone could use e.g. a 250 Hz wide filter instead of the reference filter bandwidth of 2500 Hz (SSB), which then produces wrong ("improved") reports.

73, Stefan


Am 09.09.2016 10:13, schrieb Max IK0VVE:
Could someone explain this?
 
2016-09-08 19:42  IK0VVE  0.475682  +17  0  JN61km  0.05  F6CNI  JN19qb  1119  322 
2016-09-08 19:26  IK0VVE  0.475682  +1  0  JN61km  0.05  F6CNI  JN19qb  1119  322  
2016-09-08 19:10  IK0VVE  0.475682  -1  0  JN61km  0.05  F6CNI  JN19qb  1119  322 
2016-09-08 18:54  IK0VVE  0.475682  -6  0  JN61km  0.05  F6CNI  JN19qb  1119  322 

If I listen my signal with my RX antenna 5 meters far from TX antenna my SNR is maximum +13 db, also for IZ0GIF that is about 4 km far from me.
Probably Andy has an exceptional receiving system but +17 to more than 1000 km is a great SNR I thing, HI.

After some minute great reports again:

 2016-09-08 19:46   DH5RAE   0.475755   +14   1   JN68qv   0.5   F6CNI   JN19qb   730   275 
 2016-09-08 19:46   PA3ABK/2   0.475740   +19   0   JO21it   0.5   F6CNI   JN19qb   320   198
 
73, Max IK0VVE 
 


______________________________

 
...here some of my HAM Radio projects...

--------------020109070702070306030103--