Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-da06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id D4351380002C4; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:09:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TBmgC-0005QR-48 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:08:32 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TBmgB-0005Q6-J1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:08:31 +0100 Received: from smtpout3.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.59] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TBmg8-0008I8-Ht for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:08:30 +0100 Received: from AGB ([2.26.22.87]) by mwinf5d45 with ME id yD8T1j0011skBk203D8TnF; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 15:08:27 +0200 Message-ID: <8A3A36B33B7A4837B46D102AAD328609@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: <505082C4.9040702@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> In-Reply-To: <505082C4.9040702@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:08:26 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Well yes Joe ( K) is right, BPSK is better , but needs a linear system to transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he could extract another 6 dB if the modulation system was changed ......but that's no longer Op-ook a fsk return to zero, as in some modes is not bpsk , [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.12.242.59 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 6b0411a0208d534ec13cf5eb48c0cfb7 Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0051_01CD90F0.142BD4A0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY,MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME 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 x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d404e505089841dda X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0051_01CD90F0.142BD4A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well yes Joe ( K) is right, BPSK is better , but needs a linear = system to transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he could extract = another 6 dB if the modulation system was changed ......but = that's no longer Op-ook a fsk return to zero, as in some modes = is not bpsk ,=20 As Jim's published design shows its possible to add a modulator = to a class e amp , by envelope restoration ,=20 WLOF is already coded and makes use of multi pass to gain s/n , = but is psk and needs a liner system ...and is not a one-pass = decode system , when the s/n is low .but at -41 dB , by what ever = scale , OP32 is well into the noise in single pass ? Which is back to where we started ..... But as Laurence's 'Pesky Protons' go and play somewhere else , = then we all have a ring side seat for Stefan's 'Flying Circus' = at least over this winter ! G.. =20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org ; Edgar J Twining=20 Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Message from Joe/K1JT. BTW i don't know if it is OK for Joe that his email is forwarded to = everyone in the web! But i think it would be OK for him to forward it to = a limited number of active radio amateurs operating in the 137 kHz band. = So if you make this email public in the web, it is your decision! 73, Stefan/DK7FC -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower = WSPR for the 137 khz band=20 Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400=20 Von: Joe Taylor =20 An: Stefan Sch=E4fer =20 Hi Stefan, Thanks for your interesting message. A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20 possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20 necessary code. You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20 for several months, however. Perhaps near the end of this year. One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20 possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK = a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR. Do you=20 agree? -- 73, Joe, K1JT ------=_NextPart_000_0051_01CD90F0.142BD4A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Well yes  Joe  ( K)  is right, =  BPSK =20 is  better  , but  needs  a linear  system = to =20 transmit  .... Joe (EA)  has  stated  , he = could =20 extract  another  6  dB  if the  = modulation =20 system  was  changed ......but that's   no = longer =20 Op-ook a  fsk return to  zero, as in some  modes   = is =20 not bpsk  ,
 
As Jim's  published  design  shows  its = possible=20 to  add  a  modulator  to a  class e amp , = by =20 envelope  restoration ,
 
WLOF  is  already  coded  and makes use = of  multi=20 pass  to  gain s/n  , but  is  psk and =20 needs  a liner system ...and is  not a   = one-pass =20 decode  system , when  the  s/n is  low .but  = at =20 -41 dB , by what  ever scale  , OP32 is well  into =20 the  noise  in single pass ?
 
Which is  back to  where  we  started = .....
 
But  as Laurence's   'Pesky Protons'   go = and=20 play  somewhere  else , then  we all  have = a =20 ring  side seat  for   Stefan's  'Flying = Circus'  at=20 least over this  winter !
 
G..
 

 
From: Stefan = Sch=E4fer
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= ; Edgar J Twining =
Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 = khz=20 band

Message from Joe/K1JT.

BTW i don't know if it is = OK for=20 Joe that his email is forwarded to everyone in the web! But i think it = would be=20 OK for him to forward it to a limited number of active radio amateurs = operating=20 in the 137 kHz band. So if you make this email public in the web, it is = your=20 decision!

73, Stefan/DK7FC

-------- Original-Nachricht = --------=20
Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400
Von: Joe Taylor "><joe@Princeton.EDU>
An: Stefan Sch=E4fer <Stefan.Schaefer= @iup.uni-heidelberg.de>


Hi =
Stefan,

Thanks for your interesting message.

A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20
possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20
necessary code.  You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20
for several months, however.  Perhaps near the end of this year.

One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20
possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK =

a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR.  Do you=20
agree?

	-- 73, Joe, K1JT
------=_NextPart_000_0051_01CD90F0.142BD4A0--