Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-da02.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id F3F0138000093; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 09:33:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TBn3X-0005lS-97 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:32:39 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TBn3W-0005lJ-M2 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:32:38 +0100 Received: from out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net ([62.24.128.239]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TBn3U-0000I5-D7 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:32:37 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhoLAJaOUFBcHn5K/2dsb2JhbABFpQmVNgJ+gQiCGwUBAQUIAQEDSQIUCg4BAQMFAgEDEQQBAQolFAEEGgYWCAYTCgECAgEBh20DELMOC4lVixAUgT6EcAONY5gbgmaBWgk X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,410,1344207600"; d="scan'208,217";a="398440450" Received: from host-92-30-126-74.as13285.net (HELO xphd97xgq27nyf) ([92.30.126.74]) by out1.ip03ir2.opaltelecom.net with SMTP; 12 Sep 2012 14:32:15 +0100 Message-ID: <002f01cd90eb$0279bf60$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: "mal hamilton" To: References: <505082C4.9040702@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <8A3A36B33B7A4837B46D102AAD328609@AGB> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 13:32:08 -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: 3.8 (+++) 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: Circus is a good description How many more variations do we need with so few operators to go around. Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, another on WSPR, another on Slow WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on BPSK another on ROSS and so it goes on Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs currently on LF es MF it works out at 0.37543 of a Clown for each mode. John Duffy's CIRCUS can do better than that with at least ONE CLOWN per ACT g3kev [...] Content analysis details: (3.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [62.24.128.239 listed in list.dnswl.org] 1.0 FSL_XM_419 Old OE version in X-Mailer only seen in 419 spam -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.8 FSL_UA FSL_UA 1.9 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 AXB_XMAILER_MIMEOLE_OL_024C2 X-Scan-Signature: 4ad75ad27eb9a353f40105f6e3872b5c Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_002C_01CD90EB.01FB67A0" 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, HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY 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: 3039ac1d404a50508f2a2c06 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_002C_01CD90EB.01FB67A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Circus is a good description How many more variations do we need with so few operators to go around. Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, another on WSPR, another on = Slow WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on BPSK another on = ROSS and so it goes on=20 Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs currently on LF es MF it = works out at 0.37543 of a Clown for each mode. John Duffy's CIRCUS can do better than that with at least ONE CLOWN per = ACT g3kev ----- Original Message -----=20 From: Graham=20 To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:08 PM Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Well yes Joe ( K) is right, BPSK is better , but needs a = linear system to transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he could = extract another 6 dB if the modulation system was changed = ......but that's no longer Op-ook a fsk return to zero, as in some = modes is not bpsk ,=20 As Jim's published design shows its possible to add a modulator = to a class e amp , by envelope restoration ,=20 WLOF is already coded and makes use of multi pass to gain s/n = , but is psk and needs a liner system ...and is not a one-pass = decode system , when the s/n is low .but at -41 dB , by what ever = scale , OP32 is well into the noise in single pass ? Which is back to where we started ..... But as Laurence's 'Pesky Protons' go and play somewhere else , = then we all have a ring side seat for Stefan's 'Flying Circus' = at least over this winter ! G.. =20 From: Stefan Sch=E4fer=20 Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org ; Edgar J Twining=20 Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Message from Joe/K1JT. BTW i don't know if it is OK for Joe that his email is forwarded to = everyone in the web! But i think it would be OK for him to forward it to = a limited number of active radio amateurs operating in the 137 kHz band. = So if you make this email public in the web, it is your decision! 73, Stefan/DK7FC -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower = WSPR for the 137 khz band=20 Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400=20 Von: Joe Taylor =20 An: Stefan Sch=E4fer =20 Hi Stefan, Thanks for your interesting message. A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20 possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20 necessary code. You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20 for several months, however. Perhaps near the end of this year. One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20 possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK = a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR. Do you=20 agree? -- 73, Joe, K1JT ------=_NextPart_000_002C_01CD90EB.01FB67A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Circus is a good description
How many more variations do we need with so few = operators=20 to go around.
Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, = another on=20 WSPR, another on Slow WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on = BPSK=20 another on ROSS and so it goes on
Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs = currently on=20 LF es MF it works out at 0.37543 of a Clown for each = mode.
John Duffy's CIRCUS can do better than that with = at least=20 ONE CLOWN per ACT
g3kev
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 Graham
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, = 2012 1:08=20 PM
Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas = for a=20 slower WSPR for the 137 khz band

Well yes  Joe  ( K)  is right, =  BPSK =20 is  better  , but  needs  a linear  system = to =20 transmit  .... Joe (EA)  has  stated  , he = could =20 extract  another  6  dB  if the  = modulation =20 system  was  changed ......but that's   no = longer =20 Op-ook a  fsk return to  zero, as in some  modes   = is  not bpsk  ,
 
As Jim's  published  design  shows  its = possible=20 to  add  a  modulator  to a  class e amp , = by =20 envelope  restoration ,
 
WLOF  is  already  coded  and makes use = of =20 multi pass  to  gain s/n  , but  is  psk = and =20 needs  a liner system ...and is  not a   = one-pass =20 decode  system , when  the  s/n is  low .but  = at  -41 dB , by what  ever scale  , OP32 is well =20 into  the  noise  in single pass ?
 
Which is  back to  where  we  started = .....
 
But  as Laurence's   'Pesky Protons'   = go and=20 play  somewhere  else , then  we all  have = a =20 ring  side seat  for   Stefan's  'Flying = Circus'  at=20 least over this  winter !
 
G..
 

 
From: Stefan = Sch=E4fer
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org= ;=20 Edgar J = Twining
Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 = khz=20 band

Message from Joe/K1JT.

BTW i don't know if it is = OK for=20 Joe that his email is forwarded to everyone in the web! But i think it = would=20 be OK for him to forward it to a limited number of active radio = amateurs=20 operating in the 137 kHz band. So if you make this email public in the = web, it=20 is your decision!

73, Stefan/DK7FC

-------- = Original-Nachricht=20 --------=20
Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band
Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400
Von: Joe Taylor "><joe@Princeton.EDU>
An: Stefan Sch=E4fer <Stefan.Schaefer= @iup.uni-heidelberg.de>


Hi =
Stefan,

Thanks for your interesting message.

A super-slow version of WSPR (or something like WSPR) should be=20
possible, and I might be able to devote some time to writing the=20
necessary code.  You should know that I will not be able to get to it=20
for several months, however.  Perhaps near the end of this year.

One question for you: It seems to me that propagation at 137 kHz (and=20
possibly also 475 kHz) is generally stable enough to make very slow BPSK =

a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR.  Do you=20
agree?

	-- 73, Joe, K1JT
------=_NextPart_000_002C_01CD90EB.01FB67A0--