Message-ID: <5BDDDA35.40808@posteo.de>
Date: Sat, 03 Nov 2018 18:26:13 +0100
From: DK7FC <selberdenken@posteo.de>
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: <166da18e15d-1ec2-2f07@webjas-vac148.srv.aolmail.net>
In-Reply-To: <166da18e15d-1ec2-2f07@webjas-vac148.srv.aolmail.net>
Subject: Re: LF: WSPR 475 kHz
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------060501010808050502070007"
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------060501010808050502070007
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Mike,

Interesting point. Is there a significant performance improvement of 
version 2.0 relative to 1.9r ? Or, is it worth the effort to upgrade?

73, Stefan

Am 03.11.2018 16:02, schrieb wa3tts@verizon.net:
> Stefan & All:  Indeed the propagation at MF has been favorable the 
> past 2 evenings, but I also believe the sensitivity improvements K1JT 
> built into the 1.9r and 2.0r versions
> of WSJT-X are making a noticeable difference versus what could be 
> accomplished on WSPR2 a few years ago.  On the U.S. side, it may also 
> help that a fair portion of the calls signs
> shown below are those of operators withsome  weak signal VHF-UHF-SHF 
> expereince.  There is likely some prior skill transfer involved in 
> making the transition to MF-LF for a new spectrum experience.
>
> KL7L has some very brief "days" coming soon, so it is not out of the 
> realm of possibilty.  Perhaps even on 2200m with very low A & K index 
> conditions....
>
> 73 Mike wa3tts
>

--------------060501010808050502070007
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi Mike, <br>
<br>
Interesting point. Is there a significant performance improvement of
version 2.0 relative to 1.9r ? Or, is it worth the effort to upgrade?<br>
<br>
73, Stefan<br>
<br>
Am 03.11.2018 16:02, schrieb <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wa3tts@verizon.net:">wa3tts@verizon.net:</a>
<blockquote
 cite="mid:166da18e15d-1ec2-2f07@webjas-vac148.srv.aolmail.net"
 type="cite">
  <div
 style="font-size: 10pt; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; color: black;">
  <div
 style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: black;">Stefan
&amp; All:  Indeed the propagation at MF has been favorable the past 2
evenings, but I also believe the sensitivity improvements K1JT built
into the 1.9r and 2.0r versions</div>
  <div
 style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: black;">of
WSJT-X are making a noticeable difference versus what could be
accomplished on WSPR2 a few years ago.  On the U.S. side, it may also
help that a fair portion of the calls signs</div>
  <div
 style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: black;">shown
below are those of operators withsome  weak signal VHF-UHF-SHF
expereince.  There is likely some prior skill transfer involved in
making the transition to MF-LF for a new spectrum experience.<br>
  <br>
KL7L has some very brief "days" coming soon, so it is not out of the
realm of possibilty.  Perhaps even on 2200m with very low A &amp; K
index conditions....</div>
  <div
 style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: black;"><br>
  </div>
  <div
 style="font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif; font-size: 10pt; color: black;">73
Mike wa3tts</div>
  <div id="AOLMsgPart_2_b1cfdeed-ee5a-4e07-bd52-8634eaa3ed47">
  <div bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000" class="aolReplacedBody"><br>
  </div>
  </div>
  </div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--------------060501010808050502070007--