Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id v8NB7Vaa001121 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:07:32 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1dviDz-0004mg-QZ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:03:55 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1dviDz-0004mN-Em for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:03:55 +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 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1dviDw-0001q3-ID for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 12:03:54 +0100 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF8EC20A63 for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:03:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 3xznXR0mQNz10HS for ; Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:03:51 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <59C63F96.9040406@posteo.de> Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2017 13:03:50 +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: <15ea03edd54-c07-2a33b@webjas-vab251.srv.aolmail.net> <59C2C034.3070609@posteo.de> <59C428C3.7030709@posteo.de> <579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB9AA21EE2@servigilant.vigilant.local> In-Reply-To: <579355A36AEE9D4FA555C45D556003AB9AA21EE2@servigilant.vigilant.local> X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hi Luis, Thanks for your interest. There are a lot of settings to make before SL generates the necessary txt files for ebNaut decodes. I can send you a configuration file for SpecLab later. But i think it makes no sense at that stage for you. There is a sequence of steps to be done before there can be a success. As long as you can't see my carrier there is no chance to decode that message. Also we should start with much shorter messages. 12 characters is already a bit a challenge for the stations in a range < 1000 km. Stacking many days will help of course. We could start using a 1 character message or 2 characters. [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID BODY: Test for Invalidly Named or Formatted Colors in HTML X-Scan-Signature: c40596c1cc3306f1877076595a921c57 Subject: Re: LF: RE: 300 mA on 8270 Hz Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000606050304080506070201" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TITLE_EMPTY autolearn=no version=2.63 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 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------000606050304080506070201 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Luis, Thanks for your interest. There are a lot of settings to make before SL generates the necessary txt files for ebNaut decodes. I can send you a configuration file for SpecLab later. But i think it makes no sense at that stage for you. There is a sequence of steps to be done before there can be a success. As long as you can't see my carrier there is no chance to decode that message. Also we should start with much shorter messages. 12 characters is already a bit a challenge for the stations in a range < 1000 km. Stacking many days will help of course. We could start using a 1 character message or 2 characters. Your 47 uHz spectrogram already shows changes in the day/night QRN, which is a good sign. But it looks to me that the difference should be higher, i.e. it looks like you are missing some sensitivity. You know, it depends on the location of the E field probe and the sourrouning objects such as trees. Also the high pass cut off frequency plays a role. And of course the local QRM which reduces the performance of the noise blanker. What about your remote RX location in 7 km distance from your house? Isn't it even near the sea? Can you describe the rx system that you used so far, and the location? Sorry, we may have discussd that before but maybe there are some changes that i missed. I would like to reach that goal with you, not only on 8270 Hz. And i think it is quite realistic! 73, Stefan Am 22.09.2017 15:41, schrieb VIGILANT Luis Fernández: > > FFT window time (length): 6.635 hrs > This value for example must be longer than the transmission time. > *De:* owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > [mailto:owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org] *En nombre de *DK7FC > ** > > * > Duration: 11h,31min,12sec* > --------------000606050304080506070201 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Luis,

Thanks for your interest.
There are a lot of settings to make before SL generates the necessary txt files for ebNaut decodes. I can send you a configuration file for SpecLab later.
But i think it makes no sense at that stage for you. There is a sequence of steps to be done before there can be a success. As long as you can't see my carrier there is no chance to decode that message. Also we should start with much shorter messages. 12 characters is already a bit a challenge for the stations in a range < 1000 km. Stacking many days will help of course.
We could start using a 1 character message or 2 characters.

Your 47 uHz spectrogram already shows changes in the day/night QRN, which is a good sign. But it looks to me that the difference should be higher, i.e. it looks like you are missing some sensitivity. You know, it depends on the location of the E field probe and the sourrouning objects such as trees. Also the high pass cut off frequency plays a role. And of course the local QRM which reduces the performance of the noise blanker.
What about your remote RX location in 7 km distance from your house? Isn't it even near the sea?
Can you describe the rx system that you used so far, and the location? Sorry, we may have discussd that before but maybe there are some changes that i missed.

I would like to reach that goal with you, not only on 8270 Hz. And i think it is quite realistic!

73, Stefan

Am 22.09.2017 15:41, schrieb VIGILANT Luis Fernández:

FFT window time (length): 6.635 hrs

This value for example must be longer than the transmission time.


Duration: 11h,31min,12sec

--------------000606050304080506070201--