Message-ID: <510A44F8.6090903@psk31.plus.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 10:18:32 +0000
From: g3zjo <g3zjo@psk31.plus.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120327 Thunderbird/11.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
References: <CAHAQVWP7_MhDgjesVjx4R6yx=+4h=ZVA3YG2EK+0Z=BB5qzbsw@mail.gmail.com> <5109921A.10101@psk31.plus.com> <937E72B3-2E36-4319-9E54-28F12868734E@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <937E72B3-2E36-4319-9E54-28F12868734E@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: LF: 137.5kHz WSPR2 tonight
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org


Hi Roger

Yes we won't do the subject to death yet again but there is up to 18dB 
spare on some WSPR reports.

I think there is also a human 'can't be doing with it' factor involved 
when a signal is broken and hidden in the noise.

73 Eddie

On 31/01/2013 00:29, Roger Lapthorn wrote:
> Thanks Eddie.
>
> I think WSPR2 is roughly equivalent to QRSS10, so some 5dB(?) better than QRSS3. It is possible that people did not detect the QRSS3 signal because of this, but more probable that the "manual" decode required did not happen.
>
> There is NO doubt in my mind that WSPR in all its flavours is an excellent research tool because of the Internet feedback.
>
> 73s
> Roger
> (137kHz WSPR2 still running overnight)
>
> On 30 Jan 2013, at 21:35, g3zjo<g3zjo@psk31.plus.com>  wrote:
>
>> Hi Roger
>>
>> I did take a look for you last night but QRM levels here, interference like heavy theater curtains, means 136KHz is a no go area for me unless whoever it is stops doing what ever it is.
>>
>> I am also doing it the difficult way still, running my 200uW TX on WSPR and QRSS on 475KHz producing regular spots from the UK, DL, PA and F. However confirming my previous tests the QRSS3 may as well not be there. Not one report received even from a UK station.
>> This is with the QRSS between WSPR transmissions in the WSPR window. If the mode was the slightest bit comparable then surely it would produce a comment even if those seeing the signal cannot resolve a call sign or the unique identification Morse symbol.
>>
>> I will now duck whilst it is mathematically proven that all who are decoding the WSPR are copying the QRSS3 just fine.:-)
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>> On 30/01/2013 17:08, Roger Lapthorn wrote:
>>> My LF WSPR2 tests using the earth-electrode antenna and 30uW ERP max continue this evening.   With 2 unique reports yesterday (G8HUH 250km and M0GXM 18km, both multiple times), I'm hopeful that others will copy me this evening.
>>>
>>> Please take a look for me if you get a chance. All spots really appreciated.
>>>
>>> 73s
>>> Roger G3XBM
>>> -- 
>>> -- 
>>> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
>>> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/
>>> http://qss2.blogspot.com/
>>> http://www.youtube.com/user/G3XBM
>>
>