Return-Path: Received: from rly-ma06.mx.aol.com (rly-ma06.mail.aol.com [172.20.116.50]) by air-ma07.mail.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILINMA074-8af4af758caf4; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:48:38 -0500 Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [193.82.116.20]) by rly-ma06.mx.aol.com (v125.7) with ESMTP id MAILRELAYINMA061-8af4af758caf4; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:48:28 -0500 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1N7HTm-00024W-EQ for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:47:30 +0000 Received: from [83.244.159.144] (helo=relay3.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1N7HTl-00024N-MX for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:47:29 +0000 Received: from smtp5.freeserve.com ([193.252.22.151] helo=smtp6.freeserve.com) by relay3.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1N7HTj-0007Hs-3o for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Sun, 08 Nov 2009 23:47:29 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3514.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id C11257000085 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:47:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf3514.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id B4CBE7000087 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:47:21 +0100 (CET) Received: from AGB (unknown [91.109.45.11]) by mwinf3514.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with SMTP id 3C70C7000085 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 00:47:21 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20091108234721247.3C70C7000085@mwinf3514.me.freeserve.com Message-ID: From: "Graham" To: References: <027601ca60a2$841cd150$0301a8c0@mal769a60aa920> In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 23:47:20 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8089.726 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8089.726 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0155_01CA60CD.CFB6B420" 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=HTML_30_40,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-IP: 193.82.116.20 ------=_NextPart_000_0155_01CA60CD.CFB6B420 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just a note, The power on 500 is being reported as ERP due to the problems with= antenna efficiency ... as for low power I have seen Rick ON7T decod= e signals from my station with round 250 mW feed to the Ae ...=20 G ..=20 http://groups.google.com/group/uk500khz/web/wspr-activity-from-the-uk From: PETER CLEALL=20 Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 10:36 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR In addition to what James has said. Use of the WSPR site more fully can eliminate a lot of the uncertainti= es being discussed If more stations use the WSPR website/database for reporting then more= consistency is obtained, or at least the possibility of allowing some= calculation and estimates on what is reported.=20 When reporting then you are asked to keep your tx power low and to ent= er your TX power in the set up window ,so that we all know what it is.= Also on the site there is a section where you can describe your stati= on parameters. peter G8AFN 2009/11/8 James Moritz Dear Mal, LF Group, ----- Original Message ----- From: "mal hamilton" =20 WSPR reports amongst stns indicate reception reports usually minus= dB. Most of these stations are usually PLUS dB >with me or very close= to that figure. So what does that prove. It proves the SNR is higher at the output of your receiver than it= is at whatever other stations you are talking about=20 I would say it depends on the RX antenna and not necessarily propa= gation. So how then does the signal reach the RX antenna? Radio wave propaga= tion has always to be involved somewhere!=20 A large antenna yields better results than a small loop or active= whip. Not if the small loop or whip are designed to achieve adequate SNR= at the frequency of interest.=20 When I switch from my 1/4 wave inv L for 500 khz to a smaller 40= m resonated loop for 500 the signals then do go >down to a minus db= figure. So what is all this all ABOUT ? It is probably about the different directional patterns of the verti= cal and loop antennas, resulting in different signal and noise levels= at the receiver, and therefore different values of SNR. Or maybe your= loop just doesn't work very well.=20 There is also the TX pwr to consider. Two transmitters from the sa= me location one using QRO and the other QRP will be >received at diffe= rent levels at a specified RX location. There is a lot of misrepresent= ation and misleading information by >WSPR operator This applies also to CW or any other type of signal. It is a bit ric= h for someone so shy of giving figures for his TX power to suggest oth= ers are being misleading...=20 A trace of the signal is visible long before a decode takes place,= therefore why not use QRS in the first place. Because a trace of signal is just that; a decoded WSPR signal contai= ns station ID, location, and power information, making it much more us= eful, without the operator actually having to watch a computer screen= 24 hours a day. Cheers, Jim Moritz 73 de M0BMU=20 ------=_NextPart_000_0155_01CA60CD.CFB6B420 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Just a note,
 
The power on 500  is being repor= ted as=20 ERP  due to the  problems with  antenna efficiency ...= as for low=20 power I have  seen Rick ON7T decode signals  from my&nb= sp;=20 station with round 250 mW feed  to the  Ae ...
 
G ..
 

Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 10:36 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Re: WSPR

In addition to what James has said.

Use of the WSPR site more fully can eliminate a lot of the uncert= ainties=20 being discussed


If more stations use the WSPR website/database for reporting then= more=20 consistency is obtained, or at least the possibility of allowing some= =20 calculation and estimates on what is reported. 

When reporting then you are asked to keep your tx power low and= to enter=20 your TX power in the set up window ,so that we all know what it is. Al= so on the=20 site there is a section where you can describe your station=20 parameters.


peter G8AFN



2009/11/8 James Moritz <james.moritz@btopenwor= ld.com>
Dear Mal, LF Group,<= BR>
----- Original Message -----=20 From: "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net>=20



WSPR reports= amongst stns indicate reception reports=20 usually minus dB. Most of these stations are usually PLUS dB >w= ith me or=20 very close to that figure.
So what does that=20 prove.

It proves the SNR is higher at the= output of=20 your receiver than it is at whatever other stations you are talking= about=20



I would say it= depends on the RX antenna and not=20 necessarily propagation.

So how then doe= s the signal=20 reach the RX antenna? Radio wave propagation has always to be involv= ed=20 somewhere!=20



A large antenn= a yields better results than a small loop or=20 active whip.

Not if the small loop or wh= ip are=20 designed to achieve adequate SNR at the frequency of interest.=20



When I switch= from my 1/4 wave inv L for 500 khz to a=20 smaller 40 m resonated loop for 500 the signals then do go >dow= n to a=20 minus db figure.
So what is all this all ABOUT=20 ?

It is probably about the different direc= tional=20 patterns of the vertical and loop antennas, resulting in different= signal and=20 noise levels at the receiver, and therefore different values of SNR.= Or maybe=20 your loop just doesn't work very well.=20



There is also= the TX pwr to consider. Two transmitters=20 from the same location one using QRO and the other QRP will be >= ;received=20 at different levels at a specified RX location. There is a lot of= =20 misrepresentation and misleading information by >WSPR=20 operator

This applies also to CW or any ot= her type=20 of signal. It is a bit rich for someone so shy of giving figures for= his TX=20 power to suggest others are being misleading...=20



A trace of the= signal is visible long before a decode=20 takes place, therefore why not use QRS in the first=20 place.

Because a trace of signal is just= that; a=20 decoded WSPR signal contains station ID, location, and power informa= tion,=20 making it much more useful, without the operator actually having to= watch a=20 computer screen 24 hours a day.


Cheers, Jim Moritz
73= de M0BMU=20




------=_NextPart_000_0155_01CA60CD.CFB6B420--