Return-Path: <owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Received: from rly-mf02.mx.aol.com (rly-mf02.mail.aol.com [172.20.29.172]) by air-mf01.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINMF012-94749849ecb29e; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:56:33 -0500
Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-mf02.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMF025-94749849ecb29e; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:56:14 -0500
Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14)
	id 1LTL0i-0007Le-Oh
	for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:56:08 +0000
Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net)
	by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14)
	id 1LTL0i-0007LV-BZ
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:56:08 +0000
Received: from smtp802.mail.ird.yahoo.com ([217.146.188.62])
	by relay3.thorcom.net with smtp (Exim 4.63)
	(envelope-from <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>)
	id 1LTL0h-0000xi-KM
	for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:56:08 +0000
Received: (qmail 8090 invoked from network); 31 Jan 2009 18:56:02 -0000
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com;
  h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Message-ID:From:To:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-Priority:X-MSMail-Priority:X-Mailer:X-MimeOLE;
  b=LX/WghZq8oORF42zkUtfJXovJoVDRI6eFMNVY9C99DyPoCD5UC83Li7Csd30EmP0Gw/yiRMNrvZdRF3dePzXhXLupCFQSnfa2HjbJLnRIZCBUTFVAKgkjy/VKe2qS9XDydZY+trEkjrs2KDfDcX7QpYTmnQDGtxYPdbV6WvkrvE=  ;
Received: from unknown (HELO JimPC) (james.moritz@86.135.206.173 with login)
  by smtp802.mail.ird.yahoo.com with SMTP; 31 Jan 2009 18:56:02 -0000
X-YMail-OSG: eWLoVEwVM1n1QTW9KaILWd5lkGj49zW5WZvbdypiTZIMBD6kn0WJDDASVZivsj1fLI1fw7b6WYC2hIlFVUrouUidJ6vFPWVZbPmlLsew2YdVUf2NCVi1K.E6lIYYqAopSc4sUu0JItxYn0i8s.bgmkt2fR.ZxXiTyKpZNkJELTwuf_azcyW5HnBTZE8HivfIXSpCmN5gLjd5IoB_PKa4KXOcecaj
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
Message-ID: <E8FDFAF473754AADACD6F4B6EA2B09F9@JimPC>
From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <fc7eccec0901311002g2cd2df08t70a15345ebd0131@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <fc7eccec0901311002g2cd2df08t70a15345ebd0131@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 18:56:02 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Mail 6.0.6001.18000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.0.6001.18049
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none
Subject: LF: Re: Anoterh WSPR timing error
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=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-IP: 193.82.116.20


Dear Andy, LF Group,

Oddly enough, at the time your e-mail arrived, I noticed on the WSPR display 
that your signal frequency had jumped from  503869 to 503883 Hz. It stayed 
there for 2 frames (1838, 1840utc) and during that time it did not decode. 
After that, it reverted to normal frequency, and decoded normally. The other 
signals on the spectrogram behaved normally during this time, so I'm sure 
this was nothing to do with the receiver here.

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Andy Talbot" <andy.g4jnt@googlemail.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
Cc: <jfell@tesco.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 6:02 PM
Subject: LF: Anoterh WSPR timing error


> John, G0API, has been monitoring my QRP WSPR beacon most of the afternoon,
> and getting the occasional decode at a S/N of -19dB, ie quite good.
> However, he only manages a decode about one time in 10, randomly.  The
> frequency is usually reported as ....855 instead of the ...870 it should 
> be,
> although once in a while, it reports 870 and gives a proper decode.   So 
> it
> looks as if he may have some sort of intermitetnt fault that affects
> sampling rate.
>