Return-Path: Received: from rly-da02.mx.aol.com (rly-da02.mail.aol.com [172.19.129.76]) by air-da09.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINDA091-a57494f83d5281; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:11:24 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-da02.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINDA027-a57494f83d5281; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 07:11:04 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LEjcK-000737-FB for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:10:36 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LEjcJ-00072x-Tf for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:10:35 +0000 Received: from smtp-out-1.talktalk.net ([62.24.128.231] helo=smtp.talktalk.net) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LEjcI-0007sr-W9 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:10:35 +0000 X-Path: TTSMTP X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApwEAOAST0lUDU1K/2dsb2JhbACEVbhDWI8qhkM Received: from host-84-13-77-74.opaltelecom.net.77.13.84.in-addr.arpa (HELO mal769a60aa920) ([84.13.77.74]) by smtp.talktalk.net with SMTP; 22 Dec 2008 12:10:23 +0000 Message-ID: <007301c9642e$451977e0$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <000701c962f1$b79b04c0$4201a8c0@home> <016901c963c8$1c543720$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <494EE0A8.5040607@telus.net> <004501c963cf$24a20db0$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> <000901c96356$9dffe3e0$4201a8c0@home> <002701c96426$21023f20$8d01a8c0@JAYDELL> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 12:10:12 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180 X-Karma: 0: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: LF: Re: Re: Re: 500kHz WSPR Beacon 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=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none 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 Jay You are correct in your observations. WSPR is not a productive mode. Using CW and variations thereof would achieve better results in a lot less time and effort, and overall is not suited to the majority of 500 Khz operators, with limited power, that does not overcome fading of signals. The most suitable mode is medium speed CW where the information can be received on peaks before fading sets in. An exchange of information(QSO) can take place in real time very quickly. QRS at between 1 - 3 sec dots also works at times with slow fades but takes longer. An automated mode error correction like amtor would probably work but even this could be very slow with repetive repeats and dropping out eventually, excessive bandwidth could be another problem in a 3 khz slot. For amateur radio purposes with restricted low power the most suitable mode for 500 khz is CW. In the past I have experimented with practicall every mode availabe on various amateur and commercial bands. Radio amateurs only need to exchange a minimum of information like report and do not need an elaborate complicated digital system, whereas commercial systems have to shift large volumes of information and need to be automated, this requires high power, antenna diversity arrays all of which overcomes or minimises fading and poor propagation. In the radio amateur context keep it simple and it is unlikely that anything new will be invented that is better than what has gone before. The average radio amateur has limited resources and research facilities and barely enough room to install the appropriate antenna for the job, on MF and LF. 73 Jay and good dxing mal/G3KEV ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Monday, December 22, 2008 11:12 AM Subject: LF: Re: Re: 500kHz WSPR Beacon > Jim > >>Although the band allocations do not align between UK and US, I think it >>should be possible to >>operate >> split-frequency to produce a bi-directional trans-atlantic WSPR beacon >> network. Anyone >> interested? > > > I'm interested...but the success rate EU > US has been somewhat > disappointing so far. For all of the > transmitting time so far I have copied only three lines successfully. > Nonetheless I'd be interested > in trying. Before setting things up for a QSO perhaps we should try the US > > EU part of the link to > see how reception is on your end. I'll need some help picking a clear > frequency. First preference > would be 508.5 kHz (507.0 kHz dial) although any frequency between 508.0 > and 510.0 kHz would be > available. > > Please advise. Let me know early enough in the day and I can have it on > the air that > evening...weather permitting, of course. Moderate to sever icing > conditions necessitate lowering of > the vertical/tophat. > > Jay W1VD WD2XNS WE2XGR/2 > > p.s. Suggest we start listing frequencies as above to eliminate any > confusion...or just list as > '507.0 kHz dial' and forget the actual transmitted frequency... > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.19/1859 - Release Date: 12/20/2008 2:34 PM