DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=btopenworld.com;
  h=DKIM-Signature:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-SMTP:Received: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=ROF5/D1QtltH/YWZc23V2v/G93sF+PuVo48mgCpSV3KYnmHQK0Ak6b3WEJQGMDTpyKyosVuuKGb44f68rbGJ1LuwL1e3GHHnMkq0bM49o7pGcHOy/5Zq6vc54ZIcDubXDQwdlFNI4B5tVQYgbfZ/PgPb6vMB9Kwq/J8UcNmubPY=  ;
Message-ID: <9CB097EA43A84B22B1E59AE44350F58B@JimPC>
From: "James Moritz" <james.moritz@btopenworld.com>
To: <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org>
References: <CAHAQVWOwLaz104cZGhvbLr23zt+03-J2yMBTVm+Cep-rKFTmvw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHAQVWOwLaz104cZGhvbLr23zt+03-J2yMBTVm+Cep-rKFTmvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 18:13:33 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
DomainKey-Status: good (testing) 
Subject: LF: Re: WSPR or QRSS: which is better?
Content-Type: text/plain;
	format=flowed;
	charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0  
X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mail_rly_antispam_dkim-m023.2 ; domain : btopenworld.com DKIM : fail  
x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4ad34e553156420c
X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25
X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none


Dear Roger, LF Group,

>From watching off-air signals, I would agree with Andy that WSPR and QRSS3 
have roughly equal "sensitivity". But it depends also on band conditions. 
For example, on 500kHz a QRSS beacon signal can be expected to be fragmented 
much of the time by QSB at distances over a few hundred km, while WSPR can 
tolerate loss of quite a large portion of a sequence and still decode 
correctly. On the other hand, the bandwidth of QRSS can be tailored to suit 
conditions, a facility not currently available with WSPR.

G3KEV wrote:
>...and where there is fade or drop out you can fill the gaps...

 ...with whatever takes your fancy; garbage in, garbage out (a bit like 
e-mail reflectors ;-),  but this is not receiving a signal, it is inventing 
a signal you imagine to exist. This may not be too important if you can 
identify the beacon by other means - usually by a pre-arranged frequency- 
and are just interested in monitoring how the level changes. But if anything 
is received at all, WSPR gives you immediate positive ID of a station, 
without requiring any external information.

Cheers, Jim Moritz
73 de M0BMU