Return-Path: Received: from rly-me06.mx.aol.com (rly-me06.mail.aol.com [172.20.83.40]) by air-me01.mail.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILINME014-9bf495c2a5133; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:28:42 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-me06.mx.aol.com (v121_r4.4) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINME063-9bf495c2a5133; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 21:28:36 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1LIDI2-0003YJ-SY for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:28:02 +0000 Received: from [193.82.116.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1LIDI2-0003YA-Dn for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:28:02 +0000 Received: from defout.telus.net ([204.209.205.13]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1LIDI0-00086Z-VK for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 01 Jan 2009 02:28:02 +0000 Received: from priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net ([204.209.205.55]) by priv-edmwes24.telusplanet.net (InterMail vM.7.08.04.00 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <20090101022757.JZXZ29583.priv-edmwes24.telusplanet.net@priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net> for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:27:57 -0700 Received: from [192.168.1.66] (d75-157-132-237.bchsia.telus.net [75.157.132.237]) by priv-edmwaa05.telusplanet.net (BorderWare Security Platform) with ESMTP id 2F1B061438259A70 for ; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 19:27:57 -0700 (MST) Message-ID: <495C2A2C.1070008@telus.net> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:27:56 -0800 From: Scott Tilley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: In-Reply-To: X-Karma: 0: X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,none Subject: Re: LF: Re: Re: WE2XGR/2 in JT65A mode last night Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 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=0.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS 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 X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version) Hi James and All One feature that has not really been discussed is the average feature offered in JT65. It allows the user to average sync'd sequences that have not been decoded. jt65 can positively identify the snyc information down to -33. This would allow JT65 to copy down to -33 given the determination to do so. I have had much success using this on the 2m EME path and would only expect it to work better on LF given the greater stability of the path. The biggest disadvantage to anything longer than QRSS3 on DX LF paths is the fading. It has driven me nuts watching a signal come up, copy a couple of letters or parts there of and then back to nothing. A viable DX mode on LF must be quick enough to deal with fairly short lifts and smart enough to remember the bits it did get in a lift to be used in the next lift... My gut tells me that the LF DXer of the future will be using modes like WSPR, JT65 or JT4A or similar in relatively short periods using an integration feature in software to grasp every scrap of signal received and put it to use. This is where the operator becomes the critical link. They must be able to make judgments on what to add to the buffer and what to reject and navigate the plethora of other issues that comes up while scraping the bottom of the band. One final note, a JT65 user should play with the SYNC setting. After alittle experience with the software under fire you'll know what to do with it. 73 Scott VE7TIL PS - I did take a considerable amount of data during Jay's runs and can say that on a QRSS3 ARGO grab not much is visible in the -25 and beyond range... James Moritz wrote: > > Dear David, LF Group, > > The WSJT modes are certainly effective, and quite easy to use . > However it should be noted that there is something of a disparity in > terms of ERP - The WE2XGR licences permit up to 200W ERP. I don't know > what the ERP of XGR/2 is, but looking at the station details on Jay's > web pages, I guess it must be a good deal more than 1W! So getting > signals from UK -> USA is likely to be a bit more difficult. > > The dB level refers to the SNR in a bandwidth of 2.5kHz, and this > reference point is used for all the WSJT programmes. The WSPR beacon > signals have decoded successfully down to about -30dB, so should give > a bit more margin still - M0BMU has been decoded a few times across > the pond using WSPR at the 1W ERP level; I have not tried JT65A yet. > > It is a bit hard to compare the signal levels required to produce > readable QRSS and successful decodes of JT65 / WSPR by looking at > off-air signals. I got the impression looking at the XGR/2 signals > using Spectrum Lab that the levels producing successful decodes were a > good QRSS3 level, and perhaps a marginal QRSS1 level, but more > systematic tests would be required. The bandwidth required by QRSS3 is > about 0.3Hz, which would improve the SNR by 39dB compared to the > 2500Hz WSJT reference bandwidth. I reckon you need 6dB or so SNR to > copy QRSS, so that would put QRSS3 at about -33dB on the WSJT scale, > but this takes no account of varying signal levels. > > I think the most important benefit when these modes are compared with > QRSS, etc. is the increased data rate. If you were to send "WE2XGR/2 > FN31" as QRSS, it would take around 160 bit periods, about 8 minutes > at QRSS 3, as against 1 minute for JT65A and 2 minutes for WSPR. DFCW > would be quicker, at about 3.3 minutes. The reduced time period should > allow you to take advantages of short periods of higher signal > strength in the QSB. It seems to be unusual to see periods of several > minutes when a deep fade does not occur > > Cheers, Jim Moritz > 73 de M0BMU > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: > To: > Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2008 9:01 PM > Subject: LF: Re: WE2XGR/2 in JT65A mode last night > > >> >> Interesting result Jim / Jay. >> >> I assume that the figure that varies between -17 and -23 is the receive >> value in dB. >> Given the observation about local noise then it may be the case that >> UK - >> USA could be achieved with 6 to 9dB less power. > > >