Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id A463638000093; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 17:59:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1TBuxH-0000oX-A5 for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 22:58:43 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1TBuxG-0000oO-Dm for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 22:58:42 +0100 Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77) (envelope-from ) id 1TBuxE-0004v7-5R for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 22:58:41 +0100 Received: by wibhm2 with SMTP id hm2so1993425wib.10 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:58:39 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:references:from:content-type:x-mailer:in-reply-to :message-id:date:to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=ilgPSavMRuYBHG0NPMziT+fsteMVlPLJk70i9wx2oMY=; b=uCpj/UIlQ8eZLfO5fDziP61SoxOopSiBxi/OL28V9EHKalWBQ1jQ4WmJIBYkakjbFn V0d15Ii14yufLHwawk3EWts32VmVvCv4CKL3rWwUJK71bmzKAJrnKbtAdwBIMB4FhJRA QZCD9RbIBh6SNKQ7Z1l8OhEnlCV8svPwP3shIcgCe+Kb4gilv1HyRIioAjqe5OQeJ5o8 kvV0ffac5wFmiFXWMjOxRSRXIkMj1FzJdSP9ROi1cLQ61ESj5s9aURTo73r93ErFohL4 ikPz1YnFL1h1OEesWfv33pUkgOXULsODgz3F4oL2sA+Pw8cvLpDj5r6qxeDVVAYctCAS cJqg== Received: by 10.216.132.156 with SMTP id o28mr11973153wei.141.1347487119151; Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:58:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.65] (host86-160-103-40.range86-160.btcentralplus.com. [86.160.103.40]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id cu1sm10071861wib.6.2012.09.12.14.58.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 12 Sep 2012 14:58:38 -0700 (PDT) References: <505082C4.9040702@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> <8A3A36B33B7A4837B46D102AAD328609@AGB> <002f01cd90eb$0279bf60$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> From: Roger Lapthorn X-Mailer: iPod Mail (9B206) In-Reply-To: <002f01cd90eb$0279bf60$0501a8c0@xphd97xgq27nyf> Message-Id: <8A6E80A6-C869-4559-B658-5B70F966964D@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 22:58:32 +0100 To: "rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org" Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) 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: Mal, Amateur radio is about self training and experimentation. Surely the exploration of new modes which allow communication with even weaker signal levels is worth study? Stefan, Joe K1JT's reply is encouraging. [...] Content analysis details: (-0.7 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.7 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, low trust [209.85.212.181 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (rogerlapthorn[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 94a3ffcd3903efbf0b2b811b1b1cc0bf Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-80729F74-636E-42D9-AFF6-434294CB01AC 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=0.9 required=5.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE, HTML_TAG_EXISTS_TBODY,TO_ADDRESS_EQ_REAL 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-ma05.r1000.mx.aol.com ; domain : gmail.com DKIM : pass x-aol-sid: 3039ac1d600d505105ca7ac9 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none --Apple-Mail-80729F74-636E-42D9-AFF6-434294CB01AC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mal, Amateur radio is about self training and experimentation. Surely the explora= tion of new modes which allow communication with even weaker signal levels i= s worth study?=20 Stefan, Joe K1JT's reply is encouraging.=20 73s Roger -- Via my 2.4GHz transceiver -- On 12 Sep 2012, at 14:32, "mal hamilton" wrote: > 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 S= low WSPR, another on OPERA another on PSK another on BPSK another on ROSS an= d so it goes on > Counting the number of Transmitting amateurs currently on LF es MF it work= s 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 AC= T > g3kev > =20 > =20 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Graham > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:08 PM > Subject: Re: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band >=20 > Well yes Joe ( K) is right, BPSK is better , but needs a linear s= ystem to transmit .... Joe (EA) has stated , he could extract another= 6 dB if the modulation system was changed ......but that's no long= er 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 , bu= t is psk and needs a liner system ...and is not a one-pass decode s= ystem , when the s/n is low .but at -41 dB , by what ever scale , OP3= 2 is well into the noise in single pass ? > =20 > Which is back to where we started ..... > =20 > 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 ! > =20 > G.. > =20 >=20 > =20 > From: Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer > Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM > To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org ; Edgar J Twining > Subject: LF: Fwd: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band >=20 > Message from Joe/K1JT. >=20 > BTW i don't know if it is OK for Joe that his email is forwarded to everyo= ne 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 ma= ke this email public in the web, it is your decision! >=20 > 73, Stefan/DK7FC >=20 > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Betreff: Re: Ideas for a slower WSPR for the 137 khz band > Datum: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 08:28:47 -0400 > Von: Joe Taylor > An: Stefan Sch=C3=A4fer >=20 >=20 > Hi Stefan, >=20 > Thanks for your interesting message. >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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=20= > a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR. Do you=20= > agree? >=20 > -- 73, Joe, K1JT --Apple-Mail-80729F74-636E-42D9-AFF6-434294CB01AC Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Mal,
Amateur rad= io is about self training and experimentation. Surely the exploration of new= modes which allow communication with even weaker signal levels is worth stu= dy? 

Stefan,
Joe K1JT's reply is enc= ouraging. 

73s
Roger

<= /div>




-- Via my 2.4GHz t= ransceiver --

On 12 Sep 2012, at 14:32, "mal hamilton" <g3kevmal@talktalk.net> wrote:
Circus is a good description
How many more variations do we need with so few op= erators=20 to go around.
Nice variety show with one operator on QRSS, anoth= er 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 curre= ntly 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 a= t 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&nb= sp;=20 is  better  , but  needs  a linear  system to&nbs= p;=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  =20 is  not bpsk  ,
 
As Jim's  published  design  shows  its possible=20= to  add  a  modulator  to a  class e amp , by&nbs= p;=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 =20 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 an= d=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..
 

 
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2012 1:40 PM
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 f= or=20 Joe that his email is forwarded to everyone in the web! But i think it wou= ld=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-Nachric= ht=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=C3=A4fer <Stefan.Schaefer@iup.uni-heide= lberg.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=20
a better modulation scheme than the 4-FSK used in today's WSPR.  Do you=20
agree?

	-- 73, Joe, K1JT
= --Apple-Mail-80729F74-636E-42D9-AFF6-434294CB01AC--