Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by mtain-ma04.r1000.mx.aol.com (Internet Inbound) with ESMTP id D2D9E3800016E; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:59:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Tkka2-00085l-5S for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 23:58:42 +0000 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Tkka1-00085c-Le for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 23:58:41 +0000 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 1TkkZz-0007Ni-Tb for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Mon, 17 Dec 2012 23:58:40 +0000 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 qBHNwceE005717 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:58:39 +0100 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 qBHNwc1k026664 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:58:38 +0100 Message-ID: <50CFB1A9.4040202@iup.uni-heidelberg.de> Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:58:33 +0100 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: ,<50CE5A96.40902@broadpark.no> <50CE6BDB.6080008@gmx.net>,<50CF71CE.5090902@broadpark.no> <50CFA0F5.1030506@princeton.edu> In-Reply-To: <50CFA0F5.1030506@princeton.edu> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) 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: Hi Joe, That sounds interesting. I'm looking forward to your new WSPR features. Your work for the (real) low bands is apprechiated. 73, Stefan/DK7FC [...] Content analysis details: (-2.3 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] -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Scan-Signature: 4e3b1488273adbbe9757d6bdd5adf219 Subject: Re: LF: JT9-10 @ 474 +1400 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: 3039ac1d600c50cfb1fa3515 X-AOL-IP: 195.171.43.25 X-AOL-SPF: domain : blacksheep.org SPF : none Hi Joe, That sounds interesting. I'm looking forward to your new WSPR features. Your work for the (real) low bands is apprechiated. 73, Stefan/DK7FC Am 17.12.2012 23:47, schrieb Joe Taylor: > Hi Laurence, Steinar, and all, > > On 12/17/2012 5:15 PM, Laurence KL1 X wrote: >> Steinar I was getting some reasonable syncs but appeared not >> stable enough - so that confirms it :-) Laurence KL 1 X > > LA5VNA wrote: >>> Thanks Tobias. The conclusion is clear , my system in NOT stable enough >>> when using JT9-10. Pity , but that's life ;( > > Please send me an example of a JT9-10 file that seems like it should > have decoded, but did not. NOBODY has yet done so. I am reasonably > sure that small amounts of frequency drift can be detected and > adequately compensated in software... but I can't do it without some > typical examples. > > If you know it, it will help to have, along with the file, the message > that was being transmitted. > > Note to all: I am presently working on a version or WSPR that will > allow transmissions of length 10 (or 15?) and 30 minutes, with other > features like the traditional WSPR. Sensitivity should be as good as > the WSPR-8 and WSPR-32 tests made by Marcus (and others). > > -- 73, Joe, K!JT