Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-df06.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id 12C2C3800009C; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:22:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TE5EZ-0001qI-FX for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:21:31 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TE5EY-0001q9-Uz for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:21:30 +0100 Received: from imr-db01.mx.aol.com ([205.188.91.95]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtp (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TE5EW-0005FV-MX for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 22:21:29 +0100 Received: from mtaomg-ma03.r1000.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-ma03.r1000.mx.aol.com [172.29.41.10]) by imr-db01.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id 610C93800020A for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:21:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-mub004c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-mub004.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.192.78]) by mtaomg-ma03.r1000.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 68902E000092 for ; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:21:25 -0400 (EDT) From: KKorn42@aol.com Full-name: KKorn42 Message-ID: <26496.242258fa.3d8a3fd4@aol.com> Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:21:24 -0400 (EDT) To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5024 X-Originating-IP: [92.227.81.104] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mx.aol.com; s=20110426; t=1348003286; bh=z5nRjnUeE9zbGIUOqRViAMzcvzpl98h5PNpE79bXcao=; h=From:To:Subject:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Zv7gnYBQF78IzIQzDYBEkAAIk6EjQGFvMU0aVdqxp7ywK53i0FmIaouGO7WoYcT0h l0Q2dqR/BfNlXm3MYgtrRAnXAIEtyvwmrjzUmwEtwffrZ54gCGxja5+ZYZZ5q/zgqV nu0ygt9YlVLEji0bp6TBtKSpQSri0RaS0DCdtSkU= X-AOL-SCOLL-SCORE: 0:2:448844192:93952408 X-AOL-SCOLL-URL_COUNT: 0 X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) 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: In einer eMail vom 18.09.2012 23:08:45 Westeuropäische Sommerzeit schreibt Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de: Hi Klaus, and Marco/IK1HSS, Thanks for the feedback and reports. It looks like timing is critical here. Yes it is, in Standard WSPR +/- 1sec, with -1,8 you are on the edge. [...] Content analysis details: (0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [205.188.91.95 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (kkorn42[at]aol.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain 0.2 FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT Envelope-from freemail username ends in digit (kkorn42[at]aol.com) 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid 1.0 FREEMAIL_REPLY From and body contain different freemails X-Scan-Signature: 9bd342c7d74bc0c7d15d59c1164ca995 Subject: Re: LF: WSPR tests by DK7FC Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="part1_26496.242258fa.3d8a3fd4_boundary" X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.9 required=5.0 tests=FROM_ENDS_IN_NUMS,HTML_40_50, HTML_FONTCOLOR_BLUE,HTML_FONTCOLOR_UNSAFE,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILTO_TO_SPAM_ADDR,NO_REAL_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-global-disposition: G X-AOL-SCOLL-AUTHENTICATION: mtain-df06.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : mx.aol.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d40da5058e60d7000 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --part1_26496.242258fa.3d8a3fd4_boundary Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In einer eMail vom 18.09.2012 23:08:45 Westeurop=E4ische Sommerzeit schreib= t =20 Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de: Hi Klaus, and Marco/IK1HSS, Thanks for the feedback and reports. It looks like timing is critical=20 here.=20 Yes it is, in Standard WSPR +/- 1sec, with -1,8 you are on the edge. I don't know why the time delay is changing. Maybe it has to do with the= =20 separate tool to generate WSPR-2 which has a fixed time interval between t= he=20 sequences. The PC i'm using is quite old maybe there are small time delays= =20 that are accumulating... See below: I thought you were adjusting -1,8 to -0,5 First results are looking fine though. For later regulat transmissions i= =20 shall use the program, unless it is possible to generate a 12450 Hz TX ton= e.=20 For the RX, it is not possible to set the audio BFO tone to 12500 Hz :-(= =20 Don't know why it seems to be such a problem to add that possibility.=20 SpecLab and VAC has to do the rest of the work. OK, maybe i would need Spe= cLab=20 anyway, to realise the 2.5 kHz SSB filter... Sri, do not know why you need 12kHz?? As long as some reports are coming in, the time delay cannot be to high.= =20 However i think the displayed SNR suffers from this delay.=20 Dont't think so: WSPR compares power during times of no signal with those = =20 with signal. 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 18.09.2012 22:31, schrieb _KKorn42@aol.com:_ (mailto:KKorn42@aol.com:) = =20 =20 Stefan you are getting better 1946 -4 -1.8 0.137450 0 DK7FC JN49 30 1956 -4 -1.8 0.137450 0 DK7FC JN49 30 2006 -5 -1.1 0.137450 0 DK7FC JN49 30 2016 -3 -0.5 0.137450 0 DK7FC JN49 30 =20 Monitored with indoor loop. =20 Good luck 73 de Klaus DJ6LB --part1_26496.242258fa.3d8a3fd4_boundary Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In einer eMail vom 18.09.2012 23:08:45 Westeurop=E4ische Sommerzeit sc= hreibt=20 Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heidelberg.de:
= Hi=20 Klaus, and Marco/IK1HSS,

Thanks for the feedback and reports. It l= ooks=20 like timing is critical here.
Yes it is, in Standard WSPR +/- 1sec, with -1,8 you are on the edge. = I don't=20 know why the time delay is changing. Maybe it has to do with the separate= tool=20 to generate WSPR-2 which has a fixed time interval between the sequences.= The=20 PC i'm using is quite old maybe there are small time delays that are=20 accumulating...
See below: I thought you were adjusting -1,8 to -0,5
=

First results are looking fine though. For later reg= ulat=20 transmissions i shall use the program, unless it is possible to generate = a=20 12450 Hz TX tone. For the RX, it is not possible to set the audio BFO ton= e to=20 12500 Hz :-( Don't know why it seems to be such a problem to add that=20 possibility. SpecLab and VAC has to do the rest of the work. OK, maybe i = would=20 need SpecLab anyway, to realise the 2.5 kHz SSB=20 filter...
Sri, do not know why you need 12kHz??
=
As=20 long as some reports are coming in, the time delay cannot be to high. How= ever=20 i think the displayed SNR suffers from this delay.
Dont't think so: WSPR compares power during times of no signal with th= ose=20 with signal.
=
73,=20 Stefan/DK7FC




Am 18.09.2012 22:31, schrieb KKorn42@aol.com:=20
Stefan
you are getting better
1946  -4 -1.8   0.137450  0 = DK7FC=20 JN49 30
1956  -4 -1.8   0.137450  0 DK7FC JN49= =20 30
2006  -5 -1.1   0.137450  0 DK7FC JN49=20 30
2016  -3 -0.5   0.137450  0 DK7FC JN49=20 30
 
Monitored with indoor=20 loop.
 
Good luck
73
de
Klaus
DJ6LB
 
--part1_26496.242258fa.3d8a3fd4_boundary--