Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dk05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A6E0938000099; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 10:48:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1RrtLZ-0000gc-3f for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:40:45 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1RrtLY-0000gN-DF for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:40:44 +0000 Received: from out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.237]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1RrtLW-0005hV-Iy for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:40:44 +0000 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgMFAL+4Jk9cF/X2/2dsb2JhbABDgk2CPpRLlQCBBoFtBQEBBQgBAQMWCikCDx0BAQMFAgEDEQQBAQohAgIUAQQaBhYIBhMKAQICAQGHbqZxkUCIZQQIAQocIgGEDgcCBAMnAYIYgRYEgluKaJoo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.71,592,1320624000"; d="scan'208,217";a="378850377" Received: from host-92-23-245-246.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.23.245.246]) by out1.ip01ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 30 Jan 2012 15:40:35 +0000 Message-ID: <003d01ccdf65$81c712a0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <007f01ccdeb1$cda0b1e0$0401a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> <6269AFC61EFB4E17A5884AF57C3DD948@AGB> <4F25AB0C.30205@talktalk.net> <8CEAD5DD0F8C97A-1E08-163CB@webmail-stg-m03.sysops.aol.com> <4F26AEF4.5030600@talktalk.net> Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 15:40:34 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: autolearn=disabled,HTML_MESSAGE=0.001 Subject: Re: LF: 500 opera V Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_003A_01CCDF65.816C6F80" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=5.0 tests=HTML_20_30, HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNKNOWN,HTML_MESSAGE 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-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:434927936:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 x-aol-sid: 3039ac1db4094f26bbca5768 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CCDF65.816C6F80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I ignore on/off keyed data normally because on 500 Khz around EU with a = half reasonable signal CW does the trick. also I do not report Beacon acty. At present I am comparing Opera v QRS to get first hand info and so far = all Opera signals that I can decode are also visible on the waterfall = and the majority AUDIBLE mal/gh3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: qrss=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 2:53 PM Subject: Re: LF: 500 opera V Hi Markus No Mal, Markus said its his Guess not the Answer :-)=20 Of course Marcus the figures stack up so I have to agree, in fact = practice agrees at this very moment as I stare at my monitor displaying = the "Challenge". Clearly there are other factors at work to explain my practical = experience of ZERO reports of my QRS3 signal over a period of YEARS on = 10m, yet multiple world wide reports of my WSPR (when the conditions are = right of course) and all the rig has done is QSY and changed mode. We = can rule out this being a frequency phenomena too as I have changed the = QRS from above WSPR to below.. One of those factors is the human interface, Mal himself said the = other day that he has seen carriers come and go on the band but couldn't = be bothered to check them out. Then there is the operator who can't be bothered to send a report, = with WSPR and OPERA he has no choice, other than to hide away from the = truth with no internet connection.. The need for human presence with QRS is alleviated by full time = grabbers so we can't fully blame the 'I was in bed when conditions were = right syndrome'. As for the Answer lets give it a go, a "Challenge" is running, if = anyone notices anything different please don't post it publicly although = I will welcome reports direct. BTW QRS3 carries about the same Data as is possible in OP4 in about = the same time, variable depending upon the actual Morse characters, it = could be longer maybe for Y0YQQ which OPERA could do in the usual = period. 73 Eddie On 30/01/2012 11:59, Markus Vester wrote:=20 Eddie, my guess is that in the "Opera vs QRSS" challenge, Mal's odds = wouldn't be bad at all: Graham stated that Opera-8 should decode above SNR -32 dB in 2.5 kHz = (average). Referenced to 1 Hz, this is +2 dBHz average, or about + 5 = dBHz for the CW carrier. QRSS-10 could transmit a callsign approximately in the same amout of = time. It is received eg. in Argo at 0.084 Hz FFT bandwidth, equivalent = to 0.13 Hz or -9 dBHz noise bandwidth. Thus the marginal Opera signal = would be a very comfortable 14 dB SNR in QRSS.=20 We typically give "O" reports on QRSS signals above 10 dB SNR. This = would mean that QRSS could be twice as fast as Opera... Some may prefer the digital decoder from the visual one because = "100% all-or-nothing". In my opinion this is not a benefit, as there is = no way to detect a signal below the threshold, and judge how much was = missing or what type of QRM was present. Of course, with a digital mode = yu don't have to bother investigating spectrograms - well, borrowing a = term once coined by G3KEV, then that's the ultimate "lazy man's CW" ;-) Best 73, Markus (DF6NM) -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: Graham An: rsgb_lf_group Verschickt: Fr, 6 Jan 2012 9:50 pm Betreff: Re: LF: Opera questions ... OP31 expected round -38 dB s/n (ave) OP8 ~ -32 dB =20 G..=20 -----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----=20 Von: qrss An: rsgb_lf_group Verschickt: So, 29 Jan 2012 9:25 pm Betreff: Re: LF: 500 opera V So Mal Can you see or hear my 12WPM Morse ident between my OPERA signals? I = doubt it. I could put QRS3 between, that would be a good test. Say a = cryptic message for decipher, one transmission and that is it, if Opera = decodes and the QRS remains unread OPERA wins. Eddie On 29/01/2012 19:53, Graham wrote:=20 R Mal Those signals where about 10 db over the limit , so will = show , OP16 , is about 6 dB lower again. but a decode is a decode.. = good start. =20 14:44 500 G3ZJO de G3KEV Op4 142 miles -22 dB in SCARBOROUGH 136 is being most used at the moment RA9CUA is = monitoring =20 Show all seen by RA9CUA Last report: RN3AGC G..=20 From: mal hamilton=20 Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 6:14 PM To: rsgb=20 Subject: LF: 500 opera V MF On 500 Khz so far signals decoded in Opera mode have been visible = on the waterfall therefore had the mode been QRSS the result would have = probably been better and quicker in QRS 3 - 10 The mode is however interesting and needs little operator = intervention. de mal/g3kev ------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CCDF65.816C6F80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =EF=BB=BF
I ignore on/off keyed data normally because on = 500 Khz=20 around EU with a half reasonable signal CW does the trick.
also I do not report Beacon acty.
At present I am comparing Opera v QRS to get = first hand=20 info and so far all Opera signals that I can decode are also visible on = the=20 waterfall and the majority AUDIBLE
 
mal/gh3kev
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 qrss
Sent: Monday, January 30, 2012 = 2:53=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: 500 opera = V

Hi Markus

No Mal, Markus said its his Guess not = the=20 Answer :-)

Of = course=20 Marcus the figures stack up so I have to agree, in fact practice = agrees at=20 this very moment as I stare at my monitor displaying the=20 "Challenge".
Clearly there are other factors at work to explain my=20 practical experience of ZERO reports of my QRS3 signal over a period = of YEARS=20 on 10m, yet multiple world wide reports of my WSPR (when the = conditions are=20 right of course) and all the rig has done is QSY and changed mode. We = can rule=20 out this being a frequency phenomena too as I have changed the QRS = from above=20 WSPR to below..

One of those factors is the human interface, = Mal=20 himself said the other day that he has seen carriers come and go on = the band=20 but couldn't be bothered to check them out.
Then there is the = operator who=20 can't be bothered to send a report, with WSPR and OPERA he has no = choice,=20 other than to hide away from the truth with no internet = connection..
The=20 need for human presence with QRS is alleviated by full time grabbers = so we=20 can't fully blame the 'I was in bed when conditions were right=20 syndrome'.

As for the Answer lets give it a go, a "Challenge" = is=20 running, if anyone notices anything different please don't post it = publicly=20 although I will welcome reports direct.

BTW QRS3 carries about = the same=20 Data as is possible in OP4  in about the same time, variable = depending=20 upon the actual Morse characters, it could be longer maybe for Y0YQQ = which=20 OPERA could do in the usual period.

73 Eddie

On = 30/01/2012=20 11:59, Markus Vester wrote:=20
Eddie,
 
my guess is that in the "Opera vs QRSS" challenge, Mal's = odds=20 wouldn't be bad at all:
 
Graham stated that Opera-8 should decode above = SNR -32=20 dB in 2.5 kHz (average). Referenced to 1 Hz, this is +2=20 dBHz average, or about + 5 dBHz for the CW carrier.
 
QRSS-10 could transmit a callsign approximately in = the same=20 amout of time. It is received eg. in Argo at 0.084 Hz FFT=20 bandwidth, equivalent to 0.13 Hz or -9 dBHz noise=20 bandwidth. Thus the marginal Opera signal would be a very = comfortable=20 14 dB SNR in QRSS. 
 
We typically give "O" reports on QRSS signals above 10 dB = SNR.=20 This would mean that QRSS could be twice as fast as Opera...
 
Some may prefer the digital decoder from the visual one=20 because "100% all-or-nothing". In my opinion this is not a = benefit, as=20 there is no way to detect a signal below the threshold, = and judge=20 how much was missing or what type of QRM was present. Of = course, with a=20 digital mode yu don't have to bother investigating spectrograms = -=20 well, borrowing a term once coined by G3KEV, then that's = the=20 ultimate "lazy man's CW" ;-)
 
Best 73,
Markus (DF6NM)
 

-----Urspr=C3=BCngliche Mitteilung-----
Von: Graham <g8fzk@g8fzk.fsnet.co.uk>
An:=20 rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep= .org>
Verschickt:=20 Fr, 6 Jan 2012 9:50 pm
Betreff: Re: LF: Opera questions
...
OP31 expected  round  -38 dB  s/n =20 (ave)     OP8   ~  -32 dB  =
 
G..


-----Urspr=C3=BCngliche=20 Mitteilung-----
Von: qrss <qrss@talktalk.net>
An:=20 rsgb_lf_group <rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep= .org>
Verschickt:=20 So, 29 Jan 2012 9:25 pm
Betreff: Re: LF: 500 opera V

So = Mal

Can=20 you see or hear my 12WPM Morse ident between my OPERA signals? I = doubt it. I=20 could put QRS3 between, that would be a good test. Say a cryptic = message for=20 decipher, one transmission and that is it, if Opera decodes and the = QRS=20 remains unread OPERA wins.

Eddie

On 29/01/2012 19:53, = Graham=20 wrote:=20
R Mal
Those  signals where  about  10 = db over=20 the  limit ,  so  will  show , OP16 ,  is = about=20 6  dB lower  again. but  a decode  is a = decode..=20 good  start.  
14:44 500 G3ZJO de G3KEV Op4 142 miles -22 dB in = SCARBOROUGH
136  is  being  most  = used  at=20 the  moment   RA9CUA  is  = monitoring =20
Show all seen by RA9CUA
Last = report: RN3AGC
G..

From: mal = hamilton
Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 6:14 PM
To: rsgb=20
Subject: LF: 500 opera V

MF
On 500 Khz so far signals decoded in Opera = mode have=20 been visible on the waterfall therefore had the mode been QRSS the = result=20 would have probably been better and quicker in QRS 3 - = 10
The mode is however interesting and needs = little=20 operator intervention.
de mal/g3kev
 


------=_NextPart_000_003A_01CCDF65.816C6F80--