Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-dh02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A26DF380000A4; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:24:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1T65qJ-0001Fk-FE for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:23:27 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1T65qJ-0001Fb-1X for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:23:27 +0100 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1T65qG-0003Yt-O0 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 21:23:25 +0100 Received: from freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.29.204]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q7RKNNJY007290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:23:23 +0200 Received: from [129.206.22.206] (pc206.iup.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.22.206]) by freitag.iup.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.2) with ESMTP id q7RKNNkf022442 for ; Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:23:23 +0200 Message-ID: <503BD689.2030700@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 22:20:25 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Stefan_Sch=E4fer?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; de; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org References: <06DDBDA2FE814440A956B5C33365FB75@AGB>, <003501cd8452$4ce82780$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf>, <37060B46D79F4AC69EEDBDA79B6B00CC@AGB> <503B869B.13523.54A81E@mike.dennison.ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hm, somehow my initial question and observation was completely ignored... I also remember that W1TAG reported about 2 decodes in one night while i only saw one! 73, Stefan/DK7FC [...] Content analysis details: (-2.5 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.3 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust [129.206.210.211 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.2 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: c0336009bd9bab526ca27d297ea7579a Subject: Re: LF: Re: OP missed decodes 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=0.0 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-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d4116503bd77f35ca X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hm, somehow my initial question and observation was completely ignored... I also remember that W1TAG reported about 2 decodes in one night while i only saw one! 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 27.08.2012 20:11, schrieb Graham: > Yes only go's to show , > > One Guy's ''Pixel'' is another's ''Nibble'' > > - have to keep in mid, Op is a one-pass data mode , the decode > over heads are significant compared to 'carrier detection' - > > But as Stefan has commented , the number of stations active on > 136 tx/rx is definitely on the increase, where as the PSK > map used to show the odd red spot , now its quite packed ! > > G :) > > -------------------------------------------------- > From: "Mike Dennison" > Sent: Monday, August 27, 2012 2:39 PM > To: > Subject: Re: LF: Re: OP missed decodes > >> On 27 Aug 2012 at 14:08, Graham wrote: >> >>> Interesting , is Op visible at -40 dB ? , >> >> Oh yes! I have done some tests with TF3HZ's grabber and I can see my >> Op32 on a QRSS screen when he was decoding at very low levels. >> However, there is not much in it and Opera is very impressive in >> resolving weak signals. >> >> For beacon and propagation tests Opera reports are so much more >> convenient than taking snapshots of images of a QRSS grabber screen. >> For a QSO, QRSS/DFCW may well be more useful, but the path conditions >> can be more easily determined using Opera. It is "horses for >> courses". >> >> Mike, G3XDV >> ========== >>