Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dc06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id BEB09380000CE; Tue, 5 Feb 2013 18:11:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1U2req-0003Y7-PO for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:10:32 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1U2req-0003Xy-At for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:10:32 +0000 Received: from smtpout5.wanadoo.co.uk ([80.12.242.80] helo=smtpout.wanadoo.co.uk) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1U2reo-0001U4-MY for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:10:31 +0000 Received: from AGB ([2.26.8.73]) by mwinf5d66 with ME id wnA91k00K1aYY8a03nA9Mi; Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:10:10 +0100 Message-ID: <9C06F775D1344822B5D30EBBAB8AA144@AGB> From: "Graham" To: References: <72D88C6C0DAA4B379CBBCA695EF47BF0@White> In-Reply-To: <72D88C6C0DAA4B379CBBCA695EF47BF0@White> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 23:10:09 -0000 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: 1 watt ? you can have fun in the data base , in comparing the various 1 watt erp's to see who has the best 1 watt signal , a sort of my 'one' is better than your 'one' ! UK is set to 5 watts : ) G.. [...] 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 [80.12.242.80 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Scan-Signature: 1273381c241b4bc851b7e848e0897dc9 Subject: Re: LF: declared power on WSPR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0211_01CE03F5.F19D6CE0" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_40_50,HTML_MESSAGE, 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: 3039ac1d4086511191ad3c90 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_0211_01CE03F5.F19D6CE0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 1 watt ? you can have fun in the data base , in comparing = the various 1 watt erp's to see who has the best 1 watt signal , = a sort of my 'one' is better than your 'one' ! UK is set to 5 watts : )=20 G.. From: Markus Vester=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 10:57 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: declared power on WSPR Hi Dimitris, unlike HF, antenna efficiencies at LF can differ vastly from one site to = another. So it makes much more sense to state radiated power (ERP) than = TX power. Note that under current regulations, ERP's beyond one watt are simply = nonexistent, per definitionem ;-) Best 73, Markus (DF6NM) From: Dimitrios Tsifakis=20 Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 11:22 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: LF: declared power on WSPR Hi group, I was browsing the WSPR database for MF and noticed that I am the only one declaring a 50 W power. My TX power output is 50 W, however the radiate power is just a tiny fraction of 1 W. What is the protocol for WSPR? Advertise the Pout or the EIRP? 73, Dimitris VK1SV ------=_NextPart_000_0211_01CE03F5.F19D6CE0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
1 watt  ?     you  can  = have  fun=20 in the  data  base , in  comparing  the  = various 1=20 watt  erp's  to see  who has the  best  1 = watt =20 signal ,   a sort of  my  'one'  is = better =20 than  your  'one'  !
 
UK is  set  to  5  watts  : )
 
G..

From: Markus Vester
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 10:57 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: Re: LF: declared power on WSPR

Hi Dimitris,
 
unlike HF, antenna efficiencies at = LF can=20 differ vastly from one site to another. So it makes much more sense = to=20 state radiated power (ERP) than TX power.
 
Note that under current = regulations,=20 ERP's beyond one watt are simply nonexistent, per definitionem = ;-)
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)
 
From: Dimitrios Tsifakis
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 11:22 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= =20
Subject: LF: declared power on WSPR

Hi group,

I was browsing the WSPR = database=20 for MF and noticed that I am the only
one declaring a 50 W power. My = TX power=20 output is 50 W, however the
radiate power is just a tiny fraction of = 1 W.=20 What is the protocol for
WSPR? Advertise the Pout or the = EIRP?

73,=20 Dimitris VK1SV

------=_NextPart_000_0211_01CE03F5.F19D6CE0--